The court questions civic body on why notices are being issued to citizens, permissions given without checking records
The HC said civic cases could be avoided if the BMC exercised due diligence. File pic
The Bombay High Court has criticised the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for issuing notices to citizens without proper verification of facts. The division bench, comprising Justice Kamal Khata and Justice M S Sonak, was hearing multiple petitions on Monday when it expressed its dissatisfaction with the BMC’s approach.
ADVERTISEMENT
Justice Khata, leading the reprimand, questioned the BMC’s lack of due diligence, stating, “You must be more careful while issuing notices. Your officers are sending notices without checking the records present with the corporation. Are your departments sleeping or do they not have the documentation?” The bench highlighted the responsibility of the BMC officers towards the citizens, emphasising that such careless actions force people to seek justice unnecessarily through the courts.
“You keep issuing show cause notices and force people to come to us (court) for justice. Isn’t it your responsibility to get facts verified from your records before sending any notices? You are responsible for the city. You cannot just issue notices without checking your records. This should stop at any cost. You just cannot harass the citizens like this,” Justice Khata remarked.
Further, he criticised the civic body for lacking proper documentation and said, “You have so many departments, are they all sleeping? Do none of your departments have records? There are illegal constructions all over, and your officers just harass a handful of individuals and turn a blind eye towards others.”
The bench’s remarks were prompted by instances where the BMC had issued notices without consulting available records. This approach, the court noted, not only burdens the citizens but also clogs the judicial system with cases that could have been “easily avoided” if the civic body had exercised due diligence.
Adding to the criticism, the divisional bench, while hearing another petition, also took issue with the BMC’s decision to grant permission to a Ganpati mandal for setting up a temporary pandal despite the local police denying a No Objection Certificate (NOC).
The pandal was reportedly in violation of guidelines regarding temporary ganpati pandal structures near educational institutions and hospitals, raising concerns about public safety and adherence to regulations. The court also sought previous orders from various cases and said that despite multiple such orders from the court, the civic body continues to issue permissions to pandals. “Can you (BMC) not view the previous orders?” the bench questioned.
The court has asked the BMC to submit a response in an affidavit as to how the pandal was given permission despite the police denying a NOC. The court said, “According to photographs annexed by the petitioner and Google Maps imaging submitted by them (petitioner), there is a high possibility of the pandal causing severe traffic congestion and it would also disturb the regular activities of an educational institute
nearby.”
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
