HC refuses to protect illegal structures, fines Andheri property owner ₹10L

A division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Kamal Khata also came down hard on the civic administration and the elected representatives
Published on: Aug 27, 2026, 08:25:10 IST
Prefer HTon Google
Share via
Copy link
MUMBAI: Dismissing petitions challenging notices issued by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for removal of unauthorised constructions, the Bombay High Court (HC) on Tuesday imposed costs of ₹10 lakh on the petitioner in the hope that it would be a “deterrent for all law-breakers”.
Coming down heavily on both the petitioner who erected unauthorised constructions over approximately 34,000 sq ft in Andheri (West) over the years and the BMC that failed to act against it on time, the court observed, “Unfortunately, having dealt with several cases, it is evident that the public mindset is to carry out construction first and seek regularisation only if, and when, the concerned authority ever acts. There are only negligible instances where the authority has taken prompt action. Most constructions are being carried out overnight and later expanded as required over a period of time.”
A division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Kamal Khata also came down hard on the civic administration and the elected representatives as well, saying: “As a matter of record, the BMC has over the years miserably failed to take any action against numerous such unauthorised constructions, whether residential or commercial, despite being duty-bound to do so. The reasons are obvious though best left unsaid. The elected representatives are equally liable, if not more so; having been elected by the people, they were duty bound to control it.”
Shah Constructions Co. Ltd had moved HC against notices issued by the designated officer of the K-West ward on May 26 and July 1 against unauthorised constructions on its property in Andheri (West). Five porta cabins, a temporary shed used as a car workshop, three banquet halls, multi-purpose temporary sheds, an office and a storage shed, was under contention in one of the petitions, while in another it was a shop, an office and a toilet.
The petitioners contended that the structures were “tolerated commercial structures constructed prior to April 1, 1962”. The BMC, after perusing a reply of the petitioner, however, said that it was unable to prove that the structures existed before the stated date and asked them to be removed in 15 days.
After hearing both the petitioner and the BMC, the judges said, “on close scrutiny, we find this to be yet another case where an owner of a piece of land has constructed structures without permissions on the presumption that later it will be regularised.”
While the petitioner cited a licence issued by the BMC for stone-cutting in 1961, the court said that it did not prove that the structures existed before 1962. “Apart from the extensive illegal construction, he (petitioner) has admittedly put up portable cabins without any permissions from the BMC,” the court observed, adding that assessment bills, electricity bills, shop and establishment licence issued by the BMC or any authority, cannot make an unauthorised structure legal.
In many such cases, the court said, illegal structures are sought to be protected under the guise of repair permissions. “Such pleas are baseless and cannot be countenanced. The BMC has, over the years, failed the law-abiding citizens by granting such repair permissions without verifying whether the structures were lawfully constructed, for reasons not too far to seek.”
Shah Constructions had volunteered to remove some of the illegal structures by itself but the court said that “this is nothing but an attempt to retain what is entirely unauthorized”. The constructed area measures approximately 34,000 sq ft of which the petitioner had volunteered to remove almost 18,000 sq ft, the court noted.
The bench said that permitting the illegal structures to continue “would send out a wrong message that illegalities are pardoned if backed by money”. The court asked the petitioner to pay ₹10 lakh to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center.
Catch every big hit, every wicket with Crickit, a one stop destination for Live Scores, Match Stats, Infographics & much more. Explore now!
Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.
See Less




Leave a Reply