A day after the Mumbai civic body general body cleared a proposal to convert Neville D’Souza Football Ground at Bandra Reclamation into an exhibition or convention centre despite assuring no decision until the next hearing, the Bombay High Court said it would “deal with” the decision if it found the civic body’s action inappropriate in light of what was assured in the previous hearing.

The High Court’s remark came during a hearing on Wednesday after the Mumbai Football Association (MFA) informed it that the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) had not followed its oral assurance on the Neville D’Souza football ground.

On August 10, during the hearing of a plea by the football body, the BMC had orally assured the High Court that no final decision would be taken until the procedure was followed, which included seeking stakeholders’ suggestions and objections.

After the assurances, the High Court had posted the Neville D’Souza football ground conversion hearing to August 24. “So you (BMC) have some time; BMC is saying that they are not going to take a decision [till the next hearing],” the HC had orally remarked.

View of Neville D’Souza Football Ground in Bandra, Mumbai.

However, a week before the hearing, the BMC cleared the proposal to change the reservation of the iconic Neville D’Souza football ground amid objections from the Opposition.

‘We will be dealing with it’: Bombay High Court

On Wednesday, August 19, senior advocate Zal Andhyarujina, representing the MFA, informed a bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V Ghuge and Justice Gautam A Ankhad that despite the BMC’s assurances, its general body took a decision based on a recommendation of the civic improvements committee.

“We did not seek the BMC lawyer’s statement to be recorded. But there was an understanding,” the MFA said, seeking urgent relief against the general body’s decision.

Story continues below this ad

To this, acting CJ Ghuge said, “If we feel any decision was taken which is not appropriate as per what transpired on that day, we will be dealing with it.”

The football body’s plea sought interim protection against changes to the ground’s ‘physical or functional character’, removal of sporting infrastructure or steps towards an exhibition or convention centre.

It also challenged the improvement committee’s recommendation to change the reservation without planning, stakeholder consultation, user survey or feasibility assessment.