BMC asked to explain higher FSI to Sea Rock

The Bombay high court on Thursday directed the BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to clarify why floor space index (FSI) of 5.5 has been permitted in the reconstruction of Hotel Sea Rock at Bandra when the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) has cleared the proposal only for an FSI of 2.5.

The Bombay high court on Thursday directed the BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to clarify why floor space index (FSI) of 5.5 has been permitted in the reconstruction of Hotel Sea Rock at Bandra when the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) has cleared the proposal only for an FSI of 2.5.

HT Image

Acting on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by lawyer and activist Sonia Sood, the division bench of justices Sharad Bobde and Mridula Bhatkar also sought to know from the BMC whether combined use of development control regulations (DCRs) — of 1967 and 1991 — is permissible while clearing a proposal.

Sood has alleged that the civic body sanctioned the proposal using clauses in both the DCRs, which is illegal. She has also alleged that while some subplots made available for the reconstruction have been earmarked for car parking in city surveys, one falls within the sea area, where no construction is allowed.

The activist has also pointed fingers at authorities in the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) and the MoEF alleging that they failed to take note of her complaints and reminders.

Representing Indian Hotels Company Ltd, which currently owns the property, senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas stated that MCZMA had initiated an inquiry on the basis of the complaints, and had sought certain details from the firm.

The court directed MCZMA to submit a report indicating the status of the inquiry. It also directed the state to respond to the allegations of evasion of premium to the extent of Rs1,200 crore.

According to Sood, the state government had leased the land to Elel Hotels and Investments Private Limited, and the lease deed prohibits the company from transferring it to a third party. She alleged that the property has, however, been transferred several times, and the Indian Hotels Company is its fourth owner. Sood has alleged that the state had lost revenue by way of premium to the tune of Rs350 crore per transaction.

Sood also sought a stay on construction of the 35-storey hotel, but Dwarakadas informed the court that no construction is taking place as they are awaiting clearance from the MoEF.

The court has posted the PIL for hearing after two weeks.