Bombay High Court Dismisses PILs Challenging Construction Over Rs 100 Crore And Green Zone Land Of Bal Thackeray Memorial
Bombay Excessive Courtroom At this time (July 1) rejected pleas opposing the Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray’s memorial at Shivaji Park. The Courtroom upheld the Maharashtra authorities’s actions, together with land and fund allocation.
Thanks for studying this submit, remember to subscribe!
MAHARASHTRA: The Bombay Excessive Courtroom right now dismissed petitions filed towards the Maharashtra authorities’s resolution to construct a memorial for Shiv Sena founder, the late Bal Thackeray. These petitions had objected to utilizing public land and cash for the venture, particularly in a spot marked as a “inexperienced zone.“
The case was heard by a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep Marne, who determined to reject the Public Curiosity Litigations (PILs). The primary PIL was filed by a petitioner named Bhagwanji Riyani. He argued that changing the previous mayor’s bungalow at Shivaji Park in Dadar right into a memorial was not right.
Based on him, even the additional plot of land subsequent to the bungalow that was given for the memorial was a part of town’s “inexperienced zone” within the official growth plan.
Riyani additional opposed the Rs 100 crore price range that was accepted by the federal government for establishing the memorial. The petition additionally raised issues a few change in legislation that allowed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Company (BMC) to lease out public land for simply Rs 1 per 12 months.
The petitioner claimed that:
“Your complete equipment was being moved for a personal particular person when the quantity may very well be used for different necessary issues.”
In response, the Maharashtra authorities advised the Courtroom that it had full authority to resolve the way to allot land and funds.
“It was the State’s discretion to allot land and cash for the memorial,”
-the authorities stated.
The BMC and the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) additionally supported the federal government’s transfer.
They acknowledged that every one permissions had been correctly taken and the right process was adopted earlier than the land was given for the memorial.
In its affidavit, the BMC defined that the land was given legally and pretty.
“Due means of legislation had been adopted earlier than allotting land for the memorial in Mumbai at a nominal charge,”
-said the BMC.
The BMC additionally advised the Courtroom that the Maharashtra authorities had formally modified the land standing from “inexperienced zone” to “residential zone” in 2018. This alteration adopted all the principles underneath the Maharashtra Regional and City Planning Act (MRTP).
The MHCC submitted that they had been formally approached for approvals and so they had given all mandatory permissions.
“The committee had been approached for a no-objection certificates for the development of the memorial in Could 2018, which was granted,”
-the affidavit confirmed.
In addition they acknowledged that permission for constructing a museum and entrance block on the close by land was given later.
“Permission for building on an adjoining plot for a museum and entrance block was additionally granted in July 2020,”
-it added.
With these confirmations from the federal government, BMC, and MHCC, the Excessive Courtroom discovered no wrongdoing.
The Courtroom, due to this fact, determined to dismiss all of the PILs difficult the venture.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Bal Thackeray
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Bombay High Court
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
