To right a wrong is justice. But when that involves punishing the innocent and rewarding the culprits, justice is not served. Yet, the residents of the campa cola compound in worli, mumbai, face a very similar situation via Business India, dated October 14 to 27, 2013.

1. `30
Subscriber copy
RNI No.35850/80; Reg. No. MH/MR/South-82/2012-14 TN/CH(C)250/2012-14; Published on: Every alternate Monday; Posted at Patrika Channel Sorting office, Mumbai-400001 on every alternate Monday-Tuesday
October 14 to 27, 2013
HDFC
Bank
Aditya Puri
MD
Hinterland
Express
With tried and tested products in place, HDFC Bank
is spreading into rural India. Its challenge is execution

2. Editorials
B u s i n e s s I n d i a u t h e m ag a z i n e o f t h e c o r p o r at e wo r l d
Grave injustice
The bmc is wrong to target flat owners instead of builders
T
o right a wrong is justice. But when
that involves punishing the innocent
and rewarding the culprits, justice is
not served. Yet, the residents of the Campa
Cola compound in Worli, Mumbai, face a
very similar situation.
To summarise, about 60 years ago, in
1955, the bmc leased 17,901 sq mt to Pure
Drinks Ltd, which then converted 13,409 sq
mt of the entire plot into a residential zone,
and gave the development rights to psb construction, Yusuf Patel and B.K. Gupta. In
1983, their plans to build nine buildings of
five floors each were sanctioned. However,
the builders eventually constructed seven
high-rise buildings from 1981 to 1989. While
four of the buildings are limited to about six
storeys, two towers of 20 floors and 17 floors
were also constructed. This despite the fact
that the bmc issued several stop work notices
and a penalty in 1986. Or as the Supreme
Court states in its judgment, “It is a different
story that after issuing a ‘stop work notice’,
the authorities of the Corporation buckled
under pressure from the developers/builders and turned a blind eye to the illegal constructions made between 1984 and 1989.”
So the builders built, sold and gave possession of all the flats, without an occupation
certificate (oc) and hid material facts such
as the lack of bmc approval, the sanctions,
stop work notices, etc. Nor did the builders
execute a conveyance to the buyers.
A review of the facts suggest that had some
of the buildings not appealed to the Bombay
High Court for a water connection, this case
would probably have never come to where it is
today. The bmc, instead of providing a water
connection to the other buildings, issued a
demolition notice, stating that the original
sanctioned plan allowed for only five floors.
The demolition notices cover an area of
approximately 8,000 sq mt. Yet, a 2010 order
by the chief minister’s office states that the
area beyond the permissible fsi limit in this
case is only 1,774 sq mt. And if that wasn’t
odd enough, the Supreme Court has upheld
both – the bmc’s demolition notices and the
chief minister’s order! Which begs the question – how can the bmc demolish 8,000 sq
mt when the Supreme Court has agreed that
only 1,774 sq mt is illegal?
But this case is not just about legal discrepancies. There are much larger issues at stake.
The bmc seeks to demolish these buildings in
order to set a precedent that such unauthorised construction will not be tolerated. In
doing so, it harms 102 flat owners, and over
200 innocent families. Demolishing these
buildings serves no purpose other than an
empty chest thumping in the name of making an example of unscrupulous builders,
and worse, rewarding Pure Drinks with the
fsi that will result from the broken flats. Nor
does the bmc seek any punishment for the
builders, the actual lawbreakers.
In another twist to the case, Pure Drinks
sold the remaining, undeveloped parcel of
land to Krishna Developers, who sought to
develop the property. But the plot remains
undivided as per bmc records and due to the
on going issues, the builder has been unable
to construct as planned. Many residents allege
that the builder is hand in glove with the bmc
to destroy the 8,000 sq mt, and buy out the
remaining five floors to ensure a large, prime
piece of real estate for the builder and his
backers, while the current residents, many old
and infirm would be out on the streets.
It is also rather unimaginable, how the
bmc plans to demolish over 15 floors of a
building while leaving the remaining five
intact, without any harm to their foundation or structure? By the bmc’s own admission, there are over 65,000 illegal structures
in Mumbai. Experts believe that number is
actually far greater. Then why is the bmc hell
bent on singling out this group of residents,
when it can easily charge them a penalty,
destroy a much smaller part of it, regularise
it and make it legal?
bmc supporters allege that the residents
are at fault for buying an apartment without
an oc. But in a city like Mumbai, it wouldn’t
be an exaggeration to say that over 30 per
cent of all apartment owners must lack an
oc. Besides, at a time when most people buy
an apartment before it has even been constructed, there is no choice but to rely on the
builder and hope that the plans have been
approved by the bmc. To set a precedent that
builders will go unpunished, and buyers will
be homeless is devoid of compassion, but
most importantly, logic.
u
u 12 u
O c t o b e r 14 -27, 2 013