Navi Mumbai: Denied SC relief, two Nerul buildings’ residents in a fix

Krishna Complex in Nerul came up in 2011. Pic/Sumit Renose

In the wake of a Supreme Court order denying relief to the residents of two buildings in Nerul, the future of 160-odd families is in limbo. The structures were constructed on plots reserved by the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) for gardens. As the families have been ordered by the apex court to vacate their flats within six months, they have urged the NMMC chief to intervene and hand over the land to them after charging the land cost.

The five-storey Krishna Complex and six-storey Trimurti Park buildings were built on plot numbers 148 and 149 in Nerul's sector 16A in 2011. The plots were handed over by the CIDCO to NMMC as they were reserved for gardens. When the handover took place and NMMC officials visited the site, they found that the buildings had sprung up and were fully populated. It was then learnt that a developer, Nilesh Patel, has constructed the buildings along with builders Nilesh Bhagat and Ganesh Bhagat.

Also Read: Navi Mumbai: MNS workers allegedly slap restaurant manager for not playing Marathi songs

On June 15, 2011, NMMC officials issued a notice to the developers and builders under Section 54 (power to stop unauthorised development) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act 1966. Also, an offence was registered against them in the Nerul police station as well. Ganesh Bhagat and Nilesh Bhagat had approached the Bombay High Court against the offence registered in Nerul police station, seeking a stay on NMMC's action.

The petition was rejected by the court, paving the way for NMMC to act. After which a meeting was held by the residents. A resident, Jayesh Kamdar, then filed a petition in the Supreme Court in 2018, but the court directed the residents to go to the high court. The latter also refused to grant any relief. Since the residents had given an affidavit stating that they would vacate the premises by June 2018, no action was taken by NMMC.

But a resident filed another petition in the apex court later that year and tried to get a stay order. However, on November 23, the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the order passed by the high court. Sharmila Jain, a resident of Krishna Complex, said, "When construction was happening, flats were getting sold, no NMMC official was bothered about this. When the flats were sold and builders and others profited, officials came and declared our building illegal. What kind of justice is this? We are urging the NMMC to impose a fine or have us pay the cost of the land, but give us some relief. I have paid EMIs to get this flat. Now we have to vacate it. Where will I go with my family?"

Kiran Dhandrut, another resident who works for a private IT company, said, "I have lived here with my mother, wife and daughter since 2011, I have paid stamp duty and registration of the flat too. The Supreme Court has asked us to give an undertaking that we will comply with orders in six days and will vacate the premises within six months. I don't know what to do now."

Ravi Bhandari, another resident, said, "We have no option left. We either have to go for a review plea or urge the President of India to intervene. Residents are going to suffer and the perpetrators who did this will face no action." NMMC chief Rajesh Narvekar told mid-day, "We are awaiting the official order copy from the Supreme Court and will be able to speak about it after reading it."

Supreme Court verdict

The apex court order reads, "We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the high court. However, the time granted by the high court to vacate the premises in question is extended by a period of six months from today, on the condition that the petitioners will file an undertaking before this court, within a week, that they will peacefully vacate the premises within the time granted today. Needless to state that on the failure of the petitioners to vacate the premises in question, within the time granted, NMMC would be entitled to take steps for forcible eviction including the police aid."

23
Day in November when SC refused to give residents relief