Mumbai Suburban Collector's Conduct Borders On Contempt: Bombay High Court On Delay In Crematorium Reconstruction

"The conduct of the Collector is such that the same borders on contempt", the division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar stated in its order.

On 29 September, the court in its judgement in a PIL had directed the Collector to reconstruct the crematorium which was earlier demolished for alleged Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) violations without hearing the local fisherfolk who built it.

The authorities had demolished the crematorium, which was located between two resorts, after a coordinate bench ordered a joint inspection by BMC, District Collectorate and MCZMA to ascertain whether the under-construction crematorium violated CRZ norms.

The bench in September said that the fisherfolk were neither made party to the petition nor were they put to notice despite the court explicitly stating that any demolition must be in accordance with the law. 

The court had posted the matter on November 10 for reporting compliance.

AGP Abhay L. Patki submitted a letter dated 10 October 2022 written by the Deputy Collector to the BMC. Assistant Commissioner P/North of the BMC replied on 10 November stating that an estimate of Rs. 29,64,400 has been prepared for the reconstruction work to be provided to the BMC by the Collector.

The court said that the delay of 10 days in writing to BMC, if at all it was needed, has not been explained even though the court had directed the Collector to take immediate steps for reconstruction of the crematorium.

The court perused the written instructions provided to Patki by the Collector. The court noted that the Collector wrote to Slum Rehabilitation Authority on 31 October, 2022 to obtain permission from the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority for reconstruction of the crematorium.

"This has appeared to us to be strange and surprising because the order dated 29th September 2022 does not stipulate obtaining of any such permission as a pre-condition since the crematorium, prior to being dismantled, was in existence before coming into force of CRZ Notification dated 19th February 1991 imposing restrictions and also because the direction for reconstruction was made bearing in mind the maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit", the court said.

The court was inclined to issue notice of contempt to the Collector but refrained because Patki said that there was no intention on the part of the Collector to disobey any judicial order. He further submitted that time was taken to comply with official formalities in accordance with law.

The court adjourned the hearing to November 11 at 2:30 PM to "test the bona fides of the Collector". The court directed the Collector to file compliance report before the hearing starts. The court also said that the Collector will be at liberty to transfer Rs 29,64,400 to the BMC in the meantime.

Case no. – Public Interest Litigation No. 23 of 2022

Case title – Chetan Kodarlal Vyas v. Union of India and Ors.