MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to establish comprehensive guidelines regarding permissible alterations in residential flats, following an observation that it is common for flat owners to modify open terraces or their living spaces.
“There cannot be two classes of citizens: those who obey the law and those who disregard it. Law enforcement must not be selective,” noted the High Court’s division bench, consisting of Justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata, in a ruling on July 16.
The bench added that unauthorized large-scale constructions cannot continue just because others have committed similar violations. It has instructed the Panvel Municipal Corporation (PMC) to demolish an illegal enclosure of terraces and an unauthorized room in a Kalamboli building.
The Court highlighted the prevalence of illegal constructions within flats, often due to municipal inaction or apparent official acquiescence. “This is a regrettable situation,” remarked the bench, questioning why law-abiding citizens should comply with rules when blatant illegalities are allowed to persist without consequences.
A petition in 2024 highlighted unauthorized constructions underneath a flat owner’s property, claiming that alterations—like breaking down walls—were made without any civic approval. The petitioner argued these illegal modifications jeopardized the building’s structural integrity, stressing that complaints to the managing committee since 2019 have gone unheeded.
The municipal body acknowledged the unauthorized enclosure of open terraces was demolished in 2021, but after that, the flat owner erected a temporary structure and received a status quo order from a trial court in October 2022.
The flat owner claimed ignorance about the legal status of the alterations made by the previous owner, asserting that many flat owners cover terraces and he is being unfairly singled out.
The High Court pointed out that nowadays, flat owners frequently install protective grills or sheds and alter partitions without proper permission, causing delays in obtaining occupancy certificates. The bench noted the absence of a clear and accessible process to secure such permissions.
In the absence of straightforward guidelines, citizens often resort to unauthorized modifications, a situation the Court noted does not excuse illegality but underscores the need for a transparent regulatory framework.
The Court indicated that any future regulatory framework must differentiate between alterations that jeopardize structural integrity and those that do not, ensuring the safety of occupants.
Moreover, the Court emphasized that “the law must apply equally to everyone.” It instructed the PMC to investigate and take action against all identified unauthorized constructions, reinforcing that municipal laws must be uniformly enforced.
