The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court has today rejected the petition challenging the notice about the demolition of 338 residential blocks in Labour Colony. the bench has granted two months period for the occupants to vacate their possession.
The government had built 338 residential blocks (official quarters) on 22 acres of land at Labour Colony in 1952. The additional commissioner of Aurangabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) displayed a notice on hoardings in Labour Colony on October 31, 2021. The notice was about razing down the quarters on the said land. Hence the occupants through Adv Pradnya Talekar challenged the notice in the High Court.
The argument of petitioners
The petitioners' argument was that the notice was displayed at public places without conducting structural audits of the blocks in a scientific way. The action is against the High Court's order given in the case of Kalyan Dombivili Municipal Corporation. The notices have been served on the basis of virtual observation of the blocks. It is mandatory for the AMC to perform the structural audit of old and dilapidated structures in the city before monsoon and take appropriate action adopting scientific methods.
Besides, the residential blocks had been allotted to the occupants at nominal prices in Labour Colonies at the above five cities excluding Aurangabad, pleaded Adv Talekar requesting to scrap the notices issued by AMC, also scrap the order against the occupants given in 1999 and award ownership rights to the occupants.
Government's argument
The veteran lawyer R N Borde, representing behalf of the government, brought to the notice of the bench that Labour Colony is the government's property. It falls within the municipal corporation limit, therefore, the district administration had issued a letter to Aurangabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) for taking action. The government is in need of the land.
The notice was displayed for public information. The notices have not been issued personally (to each). Hence it is unjust to admit a petition relating to notice which has not been served to the occupants. Hence the petition should be rejected, requested the lawyer. It may be noted that the bench after the hearing had withheld the decision on December 3, 2021, and announced its verdict on Thursday (Jan 20).