MUMBAI: The BrihanMumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) said this Thursday that the reparation requested by actor Kangana Ranaut when presenting a petition “constitutes an abuse of process, since the record establishes that as part of the work it was being carried out in the local”. The BMC said this in its Mumbai High Court affidavit filed by Bhagyavant Late, Designated Officer, H / West Ward, Bandra, West. He said that Kangana “has illegally made substantial alterations and additions to the property contrary to what was sanctioned construction plan. ”
At the hearing on Thursday, Lead Attorney Aspi Chinoy for BMC he said, “the work that clearly contravenes the sanctioned plan has been done with total abandon. Even in the current petition there is not even a claim that it is not illegal.” To this judge SJ Kathawalla said the petition was filed “hastily” as even Kangana’s lawyer, Rizwan Siddiquee, asked for time as he said he has to file a rejoinder and amend the hastily filed petition as he was only able to meet with the actor after 6.30 pm on Wednesday.
Siddiquee said he would amend the petition on Monday. Chinoy waited three or four days to respond.
Siddiquee said that “there is no electricity or water pipes.” Chinoy said there should be a “status quo” and that he should not be allowed to change anything. “Let’s see if he has the right to continue this type of work.”
It is a residential premises and the house helper stays there, said his lawyer.
The matter now remains on September 22.
The HC On Wednesday, in a scathing order, the HC observed that the “conduct of the corporation was very deplorable.” On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court ordered BMC to “immediately halt the demolition” of a portion of Bollywood actor Kangana Ranaut’s exclusive bungalow on Pali Hill in Bandra, West for alleged unauthorized construction. The order came at an urgent hearing, a few hours after the civic squad began the demolition.
The HC court of Justices SJ Kathawalla and Riyaz Chagla had said that “although the manner in which BMC proceeded to begin the demolition prima facie … smells bad fide”, it was giving “an opportunity to the corporation to explain its conduct. in affidavit before 3 p.m. Thursday. ”
Kangana, who was not in Mumba at the time, through her lawyer Rizwan Siddiquee had approached the HC to prevent the demolition “illegal, arbitrary and in bad faith” which, according to her, was “a sequel to the difference of opinion with certain influential people operating in the administration and government of Maharashtra. ”
BMC’s affidavit said that the illegal construction includes the construction of “new tpilets, including in the open food area and in the parking area, conversion of existing bathrooms into cabins, construction of pantry, kitchen cabins, and so on. ”
“Both in the defense of his defense dated September 8 and even in the petition, he has not questioned the making of the illegal alterations and additions. In fact, taking into account the work carried out and the content of the sanctioned plan, there is no basis for her to challenge the illegal work carried out ”. The BMC said it has made “false, unfounded and unwarranted accusations of” harassment “and” malafides “and that it should not be allowed to seek protection for such” illegal work by approaching the HC. ”
The BMC said that in the course of routine inspection of the area to Mukadam it has realized that construction is underway on September 5 and prepared a “detection report” that day. A team of officers from the district designated official H? West visited the property and found tools and workers present. “A detailed inspection” found that the alterations were “contrary to the sanctioned plans.” A notice under section 354A of the Municipal Corporations Act governing illegal construction and demolition was issued at 10 am on September 8.
According to the notice, the actor was required to present a permit for such work within 24 hours, otherwise they would be removed “without notice,” the BMC said.
On September 8 at approximately 4 p.m., advocate Siddhiquee for Kangana sent a reply. BMC said the response made “incorrect and unsubstantiated allegations of trespassing and intimidation” and “did not question the substantial work of alterations and additions contrary to the sanctioned plan,” it sought seven days to respond.
The BMC said that on Wednesday, September 9, its demolition order was communicated to the defender and posted on the site in the morning.
At around 10.55am, a panchanama was prepared in the presence of the Khar police on Wednesday and the demolition work begins in the presence of the Khar police at 11am.
The BMC said that a “substantial part of the illegal work … was demolished at the time the indication was received that the HC has ordered a suspension of the demolition.”
On Wednesday, the HC said: “We cannot fail to mention here that if the MCGM acted as quickly as the many unauthorized construction in this City, the City would be a completely different place to live.”
.
