VVCMC decision on 95 buildings leaves residents, builders in a limbo

Developers approached the VVMC’s Town Planning Department to demand an explanation. At the first hearing on Friday, the builders claimed the notices served them were illegal. They said the VVMC had itself granted construction permissions and the projects had not breached any regulations

MUMBAI: For 13 years, 66-year-old Rajmal Jain has waited to reopen his shop in his redeveloped building in Nalasopara East. Now, his wait has stretched indefinitely. Last week, the Vasai-Virar City Municipal Corporation (VVCMC) put on hold the process of granting Occupation Certificates (OCs) and registering 95 buildings after finding that they had been granted excess Floor Space Index (FSI) by a former civic chief.

VVCMC decision on 95 buildings leaves residents, builders in a limbo

Just like Jain, VVCMC commissioner Prithiviraj PB’s decision has impacted hundreds of other families. They were served notice last week, stating that the OC and registrations for the redeveloped projects had been halted. The files for the redeveloped projects have been sent to the state Urban Development Department (UDD) to be reviewed, leaving home buyers and developers in Vasai-Virar, distressed.

Developers approached the VVMC’s Town Planning Department to demand an explanation. At the first hearing on Friday, the builders claimed the notices served them were illegal. They said the VVMC had itself granted construction permissions and the projects had not breached any regulations. “We took all legal permissions. The entire building is ready but we can’t sell any flats with the VVCMC’s latest decision,” said a builder.

Permissions for redevelopment of old buildings in Vasai-Virar were granted from 2023, while the civic body was under administrative rule, awaiting an election. It was during this period that several projects were launched across the Vasai-Virar belt. The municipal commissioner then was Anilkumar Pawar, who has been discharged in a case by the Enforcement Directorate for the construction of 41 unauthorised buildings. Then town planner Y S Reddy is in jail after his arrest in the case. The VVMC had under Pawar allegedly extended the benefit of additional FSI for tenants, relying on the Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations (UDCPR).

The incumbent municipal commissioner has put on hold the OC and registration process for buildings granted additional FSI during Pawar’s tenure, arguing that the FSI rules applicable to tenants, specifically a 15-sq m provision, would not be applicable in this context.

Subsequently, a stay was imposed on construction of these projects. Manish Bhishnurkar, deputy director, town planning department, says the matter involves over 90 files and further decisions will be taken with the UDD’s guidance.

Representing the developers, advocate Nimesh Vasa argues that the notices halting the OC process are illegal, citing provisions of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act. He contends that once a Commencement Certificate (CC) is issued, construction cannot be halted unless rules have been violated.

Vasa also said the notice failed to specify the legal section under which the work was ordered to be stopped. Furthermore, he claimed, the VVMC lacks the authority to halt the registration of documents for approved projects.

“Will rules change simply because the commissioner has changed,” asks a developer. “We have taken loans to invest in projects and have been waiting for an OC for eight months. Homebuyers are pressuring us to hand over possession,” he said.

Under the UDCPR 2020 regulations, the FSI for the redevelopment of old buildings is to be granted based on specific conditions regarding road width and building height. However, for the buildings in question, it appeared that the conditions were flouted.

The question before the VVCMC, however, is whether or not additional construction, carried out based on approvals granted earlier allegedly in violation of the law, can hold up an OC. It’s what the VVMC has asked the UDD to help them sort out.

Since many of these projects are registered under MahaRERA, the repercussions are likely to affect home buyers as well. Citizens who purchased apartments based on construction approvals now confront the question – what becomes of those who purchased flats in good faith?

Tejpal Jain, 56, a plywood shop owner, was to receive a new apartment and a shop in the redeveloped 21-storey Bluestar building in Nalasopara. He was promised the flat by June 2026, “We wanted to live in a highrise to get relief from flooding during the monsoon.” Jain doesn’t know how many more monsoons he will have to endure before he gets his new home and shop.

Likewise, for Ashraf Sheikh, 25, leaving his ancestral home in Mahim and shifting to Virar was not easy. A call centre employee, Sheikh booked an apartment on the 15th floor of Karari Heights in Nalasopara west, “We were told registration for the new flat would be done by 2026. We left Mahim and shifted to rented accommodation here. We are paying ₹16,000 in rent, which we will have to keep paying till we get possession of our new home,” said Sheikh.