New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Dec 11, 2019-Wednesday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Wednesday, Dec 11, 2019

No CRZ violation, HC asks BMC to release OC of Dahisar bldg

mumbai Updated: Nov 20, 2019 00:36 IST
Kanchan Chaudhari
Kanchan Chaudhari
Hindustantimes
         

The Bombay high court (HC) has paved the way to occupy a stilt-plus-21-storey building at Dahisar (West).

Justice KK Tated on Friday directed the civic body to issue the completion and occupancy certificates (OC) for the building, which were withheld by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for two decades, on the ground that the structure violated Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms.

The BMC had passed an order to demolish the structure after the developer failed to pay the fee for the approval of an amended construction plan for the building. The developer had in 1998, filed a petition before the Dindoshi court, challenging the BMC’s demolition notices.

The Dindoshi court in 2014, held that the building was constructed as per the sanctioned plan and declared that it was not unauthorised. However, the trial court also held that the building was situated within a CRZ and thus the developer was not entitled to completion and OC.

Both the developer and the BMC had filed appeals against the trial court order. While the developer challenged the trial court verdict that it was not entitled to completion certificate and OC, the BMC appealed against the decision to stay the demolition of the structure.

On Friday, Justice Tated held that the intimation of disapproval (IOD) for the building’s construction was granted in 1992. An IOD is the permission given to the developer by the civic body to construct a new building.

The court observed that the building was completed before the area was categorised as CRZ in 2000, and thus it cannot hold that the structure had violated CRZ norms. It also held that the completion certificate and OC for the structure cannot be withheld and rejected the BMC’s claim that the structure was illegal, only because the civic body had not released the copy of the amended approved plan to the developer.