Disposed

Brashtachar Nirmoolan Sanghatana Mumbai and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC21 Nov 2007PIL/37/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of public interest litigation petitions seeking directions against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to prevent flooding and ensure waste management. The Court was satisfied by affidavits filed by the Corporation stating steps taken and accepted the statements as adequate.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed accepting affidavits filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai stating works are in progress; no specific conveyance ordered beyond expectation of adherence.

Brashtachar Nirmoolan Sanghatana Mumbai… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2007)

¶1

bsb

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2684 OF 2005

¶5

Dr. Sandip Rane & ors.... Petitioners

¶6

V/s

¶7

Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai
& ors.... Respondents

¶8

ALONGWITH

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 2989 OF 2005

¶10

The Committee for Projections
Democratic Right... Petitioner

¶11

V/s

¶12

State of Maharashtra & ors.... Respondents

¶13

ALONGWITH

¶14

Bhrashtachar Nirmoolan Sanghatana,
Mumbai & anr.... Petitioners

¶15

V/s

¶16

Union of India & ors.... Respondents

¶17

Mr. Vivek Shiralkar i/by M/s. Shiralkar & Co. for the
petitioners in W.P. No.2684 of 2005.

¶18

Ms. M.M.Malar i/by Rekha Rajgopal for the Resp. No.5 in
W.P.No. 2684 of 2005.

¶19

Ms. Seema Chhetri with suresh Kumar for the Resp.No.7
in W.P.No. 2684 of 2005.

¶20

Ms. Shakuntala Joshi i/by Anand Poojari for the
petitioners in PIL No. 37 of 2006.

¶21

¶22

Mr. R.B. Raghuvanshi, A.S.G. for the Respondent Union
of India.

¶23

Mr. K.K. Singhavi, Sr.Advocate with Ms. Shobha Ajeet
Kumar for the respondent B.M.C.

¶24

Mr.D.N.Nalawade, Govt. Pleader for the respondent State.

¶25

Ms. Kiran Bagaria for the respondent M.M.R.D.A.

¶26

CORAM: J.N. PATEL &

¶27

SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ.

¶28

DATED: 21ST NOVEMBER, 2007.

¶29

P.C.:

¶30

1. These are public interest litigations in which the
petitioners have sought directions against the Municipal
Corporation for Greater Mumbai to take immediate steps
to ensure that there is no flooding of the city in the
monsoon.

¶31

2. P.I.L.No.2684 of 2005 is the main petition in which
the petitioners have sought implementation of the
BRIMSTOWAD Report. The prayers sought in that petition
are as follows:-

¶32

"PRAYER A: Drainage System.

¶33

(i) that, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to
issue a writ of mandamus or such other
appropriate writ, order or directions of this
Hon’ble Court directing the concerned
respondents herein to implement
recommendations of the whole of BRIMSTOWAD
Report with such improvements or upgradation

¶34

¶35

as may be required for upgradation of the
drainage system in Bombay in an expeditious
and time bound manner at the earliest;

¶36

(ii) that the open water drainage system along
the Eastern and Western Express Highway and
other main roads and by-lanes which are
covered by concrete slabs be opened and
covered with iron grills, so as to ensure free
flow of water into the drains and easy
cleaning of the drains;

¶37

(iii) the drainage system in Bombay be
directed to be brought under the sole and
exclusive control of Municipal Corporation of
Greater Mumbai and all other respondents and
statutory authorities be ordered and directed
to comply with the directions and orders of
the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
and no further work of construction of roads,
digging or diverting of natural or artificial
water drains, buildings or otherwise be
allowed to be done without clearance of High
Power Committee appointed by S.W.D.
Department of Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai;

¶38

(iv) that appropriate drainage system and
culverts be installed in a time bound
programme along the railway tracks so as to
avoid water, flooding the railway tracks;

¶39

(v) that all natural drains and rivers in
Bombay be de-silted, cleaned, deepened and/or
widened so as to allow free flow of water and
avoid water logging;

¶40

(vi) that approximate measures be taken to
identify the areas which are prone to be
affected by flood and water logging and
appropriate measures be taken to establish
pumping stations to pump out the water in
emergencies;

¶41

(vii) that choking of the mouth of Mithi River
at Mahim be removed.

¶42

PRAYER-B: Waste Management and Cleaning of
Public streets and utilities.

¶43

That a writ of mandamus and/or such other

¶44

¶45

appropriate writ or order and/or directions be
passed against all the concerned respondents
to the effect that -

¶46

(i) the entire city is cleaned of waste and
rubbish accumulated at various places,
drainage systems, nallas, railways tracks,
roads and providing for clearing the
accumulated wastes at regular intervals and
several times a day and to ensure that no
wastes are accumulated on the roads;

¶47

(ii) laws relating to cleanliness and throwing
of waste and litter be stringently and
strictly enforced;

¶48

(iii) the respondents be directed to take
steps for removal of waste at regular
intervals at least 2-3 times a day;

¶49

(iv) all receptacles/collection centers shall
be kept clean and tidy every day and
garbage/rubbish should not be allowed to be
found around the collection centers;

¶50

(v) respondent No.1 be directed to comply with
Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules
2000;

¶51

(vi) that order and directions be passed for
construction of an additional 70,000 public
toilets throughout the city of Mumbai at
appropriate locations;

¶52

(vii) increasing the number and locations of
dumpsters on the roads and regular cleaning of
these dumpsters be carried out at least twice
a day to prevent the accumulation of garbage;

¶53

(viii) that dry waste and wet waste be
segregated at the point of collection by
providing for separate dump stands or bins.

¶54

PRAYER-C: Sewage System.

¶55

That appropriate orders and directions be
passed against respondent No.1:-

¶56

(i) to implement Macdonald Report regarding
the sewage system in Mumbai;

¶57

¶58

(ii) that the sewage water should be treated
under stringent pollution control norms before
it is allowed to be drained in the sea;

¶59

(iii) that the drainage and sewage system be
ordered to be separated;

¶60

(iv) adequate pumping stations be provided for
pumping out of the treated sewage water in the
sea.

¶61

PRAYER-D: Local Railways.

¶62

That appropriate orders, directions or writ be
issued against the respondent Nos. 4 and 7
for the following:-

¶63

(i) increasing the frequency of locals in
Mumbai and number of railway rakes and
improving state of railway platforms, bridges,
ticketing counters, toilets, entry and exit
points and railways tracks, etc.;

¶64

(ii) installation of water pumps at areas,
which are prone to flooding for pumping out
the water and if required elevate the railway
tracks at appropriate places;

¶65

(iii) Laying of adequate culverts or drains
alongside or under the rail tracks for free
and easy flow of storm water.

¶66

PRAYER-E: Disaster Management Plan.

¶67

Directions to be given to the concerned
respondents to set up a proper Disaster
Management Plan for city of Mumbai with the
help and involvement of the police, fire
brigade, State and Municipal Hospitals, Health
Centres, Reserve Police and Central Reserve
Police and Indian Army, which should be
available at short notice to render necessary
help and succour to the affected persons and
as set out in this petition.

¶68

PRAYER-F: Right of Information Act.

¶69

(i) Appropriate orders and directions be
passed to ensure that the provisions of Right
to Information Act are effectively implemented

¶70

¶71

by the respondents and true copies of the
documents are made available to the citizens
at reasonable costs not exceeding Rs.1/- per
page.

¶72

3. Affidavits have been filed on behalf of the
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai on various
occasions detailing the efforts taken by the Corporation
to implement the recommendations contained in the
BRIMSTOWAD Report. Dilip Kamalakar Pathak, Deputy Chief
Engineer (SWD) of the Corporation has also filed an
affidavit on 30th October, 2007 wherein he has stated
that the works would be undertaken in accordance with
the BRIMSTOWAD Report in two phases. He has stated
that, out of 20 works proposed in Phase-I, 19 works are
in progress and the construction of the pumping station
is expected to commence shortly. He has also stated
that the works in respect of Phase-II will commence in
January, 2008. Finally it has been stated that, all
works undertaken as per the BRIMSTOWAD Report are
proposed to be completed in the year 2011.

¶73

4. In our view, therefore, prayer clauses (A) & (C) of
the petition have been adequately answered by the
Corporation. We expect, the Corporation and its
officials to abide by the statements made in the
affidavits filed by them in this petition.

¶74

¶75

5. As regards Prayer (B) regarding Waste Management and
Cleaning of Public Streets and Utilities, we expect that
the Corporation will take appropriate steps to implement
the Waste Management Programme and ensure that public
streets and utilities are cleaned.

¶76

6. The petitioners in P.I.L.No.2684 of 2005 have
sought directions against the local railways in prayer
clause (D). We refrain from considering this prayer in
this petition as the Corporation has no control over the
local railways. We, therefore, permit the petitioners
to agitate this prayer in future, if necessary.

¶77

7. In view of the above, we dispose of the petitions
accepting the statements made in the affidavits filed by
the respondent Corporation.

¶78

( J.N. PATEL, J. )

¶79

( SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. )

Brashtachar Nirmoolan Sanghatana Mumbai and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brashtachar Nirmoolan Sanghatana Mumbai and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Digambar Balgude Vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.

R. a. Dada and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Babanrao Walke and Anr. Vs Videsh Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and Ors.

Vijay Kashinath Bhosale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Janjagruti Grahak Munch Raigad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sanjay Balasaheb Kotame Vs the Regional Officer - Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and Ors.

Manavta Parmodharam Yuvak Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

P. M. Havnur Vs State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Dattatraya Deoram Koli (Baviskar)

Mohammed Shafi Machhiwala and Anr. Vs Head Inspector- Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

The Director of Education -State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Nanasaheb Nimba Bagul and Ors.

S.M. Adhate Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Aziz Karim Shaikh and Ors., Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sital. K. Harchandani and Anr. Vs the Commissioner of Police, Thane and Ors.