'You may face a fate like Supertech twin towers', Bombay HC warns developer
The Bombay high court on Tuesday (August 30) warned a developer insisting on constructing a building adjacent to a plot reserved for a playground despite a stay from the Supreme Court and the HC that he may face a fate similar to Supertech’s illegal twin towers in Noida that were demolished.
The remark was made by a division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice M S Karnik, while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) which claimed that the real estate developer was encroaching on land reserved for a playground in the Khar suburb in Mumbai.
The court had last week deputed an architect to visit the site where the developer had proceeded with construction flouting a 1995 Supreme Court order. They had asked the architect to submit a report on how much of the building had been constructed.
On Tuesday (August 30), the bench was informed the report has been submitted by the architect following which the court adjourned the matter for further hearing on September 20. However, the advocate appearing for the developer urged the court to vacate the stay on the construction till demarcation of the land was completed.
Chief Justice Datta refused and said, “Let’s wait. You may face fate like Supertech.”
Supertech’s twin towers located in Noida near New Delhi were demolished using explosives on August 28 following Supreme Court orders. It was held that the twin towers – Apex (32 storeys) and Ceyane (29 storeys) were illegally built. The real estate company paid for the demolition which cost about ₹20 crore.
Last week, the HC had come down heavily on the Mumbai developer for proceeding with the construction despite an order from the SC in 1995. The order had said no construction should be carried out on the 6,000 square metres plot that was reserved for a playground under the 1992 development plan.
The Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), a Maharashtra government agency that had permitted Integrated Realty Project to develop the adjoining plot, said boundaries of the plot have changed and the size of the proposed playground was reduced to 5,255 square metres from the original 6,000 square metres.
The court had last week held that in view of the rival claims, it was necessary for them to ascertain as to what is the exact extent of vacant land available for the playground.