State Police Complaints Authority, Maharashtra

State Police Complaints Authority, Maharashtra

If you are not satisfied with the working of the police, like not registering FIR, etc.

You can send your complaint to the above authority for quick redressal.

Unfortunately, it does not have a proper web site…….

 

16 November 2017

I visited the office of the State Police Complaints Authority personally to file a complaint against the police for not registering an FIR.
The office people were nice.
Let us see the outcome.

Public Garden converted into Club House – Chief Justice visits site

 

In a rare action, the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court goes incognito and catches a Builder’s lie.

By Alka Dhupkar, Mumbai Mirror | Updated: May 6, 2017, 08.05 AM IST

Final order likely next month; PIL says garden turned into clubhouse
Justice Chellur was stopped from entering a public park at Cuffe Parade, confirming allegations that the builder had turned it into a private space

A huge land parcel in south Mumbai will be thrown open to public after Manjula Chellur, chief justice of the Bombay High Court, inspected it incognito and found that allegations of a developer taking it over illegally were true.


Justice Chellur posed as a regular Mumbaikar out on a stroll last week when she was prevented by the builder’s security guards from entering the premises, abutting the 32-storey DSK Durgamata luxurious apartments at Cuffe Parade. It comes as no surprise that Justice Chellur, in her observation yesterday, said the premises should be restored as a public open space, and the security of the premises be taken over by the BMC. The matter has been posted for a final hearing next month. The case pertains to the 16,000 sq ft plot on Prakash Pethe Marg where DSK Developers were allowed to construct a gymnasium on 33% of the plot area. The remaining 67% – almost 11,000 sq ft – was to be developed for public usage.

A petition filed in HC by activist Sanjay Kokate said the builder usurped a plot to build a clubhouse, leaving little space for citizens. The petition added that the builder violated several conditions of the agreement with the BMC.

Nearly eight months after the petition was filed, the high court in March this year directed that a technical expert will inspect the plot. While an inspection committee submitted its report yesterday damning the builder, Justice Chellur, who experienced first-hand what hundreds of citizens attempting to access the garden go through, said the plot must be restored as public space immediately.

While representatives of DSK Developers refused to comment on Friday’s verdict, the inspection committee comprising officials of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and the Bombay HC said it found nothing for the public at the premises. In a seven-page report, the committee said, “We did not find any equipment for children to play… no swings, no slides, nor benches there. There was a garden which could, at best, be described as a `landscape garden’, not a recreation garden.”

The report also said there were no signs that said the plot was for public usage. “Entry to the said area is restricted by deploying security guards at the gate. The access way is used by the occupants of the DSK tower for ingress. We were stopped at the entrance by the security guards, and allowed to enter only after disclosing our identities,” the report said.

Petitioner Kokate’s lawyer Yusuf Iqbal Yusuf said the case was a classic example of a public property being converted for personal use. “An independent surveyor appointed by the HC last year prepared a fake report to favour DSK. The chief justice, however, appointed court officers to inspect the premises. Also, in the most proactive manner, the chief justice herself visited the premises without informing anyone and said she was also prevented from entering the premises. The court has now posted the matter to June for passing final orders,” Iqbal said.

 

(Reproduced from Mumbai Mirror.)

 

National Green Tribunal decides on municipal issues such as parking spaces, recreation grounds and fire safety within the scope of environment jurisdiction


By this judgment, for the first time, the National Green Tribunal brought municipal issues such as parking spaces, recreation grounds and fire safety within the scope of environment jurisdiction.”

 

Judgement of the National Green Tribunal (Principal Bench, New Delhi) in the matter of Sunil Kumar Chugh & Ors. Vs. Secretary, Environment Department, Govt. of Maharashtra & amp; Ors. dated 03/09/2015

In this landmark order The National Green Tribunal, directed a developer to remit Rs 3 crore towards the environmental relief fund and stopped the construction and sale of a slum rehabilitation project at Antop Hill, Mumbai till the amount was paid and plans amended to include additional parking space.

The order was in an appeal filed by Sunil Chugh against environmental clearances granted to Priyali Builders last March for construction on a 6,500- sq m plot in Sion-Koliwada despite violations to the town planning and environmental laws.

After hearing advocate Aditya Pratap for Chugh, Vikas Malhotra for the environment department, Anand Yagnik for the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) as well as others, the tribunal panel, headed by former Supreme Court judge Swatanter Kumar, held that the builder needs to correct certain lapses in the project.

The panel directed the builder to pay Rs 3 crore to the SRA within a fortnight and Rs 32 lakh towards deficient recreational area to the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board for incurring expenses on environmental and ecological rehabilitation. The tribunal said that the developer must modify the building plans and get them approved for additional parking space in the sale building from the seventh storey upward to make parking space available for both the rehabilitation building and the sale building. It also imposed a Rs 1 lakh cost on the builder.

The land, which was encroached by slums, was reserved for a municipal office and road when the builder submitted a proposal to the SRA to rehabilitate 324 tenements in 1997. Five years later, the builder got the first letter of intent for 14,600 sq m built-up area and was later granted permission for more construction, which the tribunal was told exceeded 20,000 sq m attracting a prior environment clearance.

The builder said the SRA had permitted reduction in the amenity area to 8% and allowed the recreational area above the podium level. But the tribunal observed that the SC held that “right to clean and healthy environment is within the ambit of Article 21 (right to life) and that open land around a building can only be at the ground level, not podium”.

Observing lack of paucity of parking space, the tribunal directed that “three floors shall be made available from seventh floor onwards from the area available for construction of flats…to ensure adequate parking spaces…and ensure that vehicles do not spill out on the streets resulting in congestion and prevent adverse impacts on the environment”.

The judgment written by judicial member U D Salvi said the term built-up area includes both FSI and non-FSI areas. In this case, the built-up area was 30,000 sq m, which included over 12,000 sq m of non-FSI area. This will help end the practice of builders trying to separate the two to evade environment clearance, said a lawyer.

 

 Link to the full decision:

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/building%20environment%20clearance%20NGT%20Mumbai.pdf

Air Pollution in Mumbai

 

The past few weeks have been very distressful for me. I have been deeply concerned with the increasing air pollution in Mumbai and the increasing number of diseases directly related to it. I, my wife and two sons have been seriously effected. I have been thinking of taking some action.

Though I do not agree with the odd even rule on the movement of cars imposed in Delhi which is riddled with so many litigations, and uncertainties, drastic action is needed in Delhi.

One of the measures I would suggest is the use of vacuum cleaning trucks which are used in several countires. We can take help and opinion from them.

 

Air Pollution in Mumbai


Coming back to the air pollution in Mumbai, I am relieved to note that the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench in New Delhi, has passed the following order on 6-January-2016:

 

“ In view of the fact that the matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, particularly the order dated 16th December, 2015 in relation to matter relating to air pollution in NCT, Delhi, we are of the considered view that Tribunal should not pass any directions in this regard at this stage. Therefore we would restrict these petitions for the present only to the places other than Delhi, in relation to air pollution by different sources and subject to such orders as may be passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.


“ We therefore have to decide the matter relating to air pollution in other major cities like Bombay, Kolkata, Bangalore, Patna, Lucknow, Allahabad, Kanpur, Varanasi, Pune, Nagpur, Chennai, Hyderabad, Ludhiana, Jallandhar and Amritsar. Let Notice be issued to all the Learned Counsel appearing for the respective states relating to these cities.


“The ambient air quality samples will be taken and analysis report be submitted before the Tribunal. They shall also state the steps they are taking for controlling and preventing the air pollution, resulting from dust emission because of the constructions and other activities, emission from burning of Municipal Solid Waste and other waste including burning of agriculture residue and vehicular pollution. The Pollution Control Board of the respective States in consultation with the Central Pollution Control Board shall prepare a report and analyse the ambient air quality samples forthwith in the related cities as indicated.

“List this matter on 09th February, 2016.”

We should be happy with this welcome development.

 

I am giving the link to the National Green Tribunal’s Order:

http://www.greentribunal.gov.in/Writereaddata/Downloads/21-2014(PB-I)OA6-1-2016.pdf

 

Dog and Propensity to Bite


I have come across several instances of infighting between members of housing societies; and between members and the managing committee over pets, especially dogs.

The news about ex Law Minister of Delhi, Somnath Bharti, his wife Lipika, and his pet dog Don make interesting reading.
I will not offer any comments – because firstly, I am not aware of the entire facts; and secondly, the matter is already before the courts.

According to British Law, which we follow to a great extent, if a dog has a propensity to bite, he can be put to sleep (or put to death).
I will illustrate this brilliant concept, and its more brilliant interpretation, by a British Judge.

There was a charge of propensity to bite against a particular dog. The trial magistrate upheld the charge and ordered the dog to be put to sleep.
The owner appealed.  The owner came to the court with the dog. The Judge was a lover of pets. He stretched his arm towards the dog and said   see what a harmless dog this is.
The dog immediately bit the Judge. His hand started bleeding profusely and he had to be taken to his ante chamber for dressing.

Every one in the Court room was shocked. What greater evidence was needed to prove that the dog had a propensity to bite!
When the Judge returned to the Court room, to every one’s surprise, he said that it was not the dog’s fault, but his fault. He had stretched his hand right into the dog’s mouth. And the dog won the day!

This is a true example of justice at its best.

 

 

 

Mobile Towers – Are they Health Hazards ?

Kiran Shantaram and others have recently filed a writ in the Bombay High Court against the installation of Mobile towers in a Municipal Garden adjoining the Raj Kamal Studio compound in Parel, Mumbai. 
The Bombay High Court has not granted any interim order so far.

The fact remains that it is not clear whether the radiation are health hazards.
Environment activists feel that they are health hazards. 

Experts are divided. And there is no conclusive evidence or study to indicate that the radiation is a health hazard.

The issue has been decided by at at least three High Courts. The High Courts  have held that the radiation is not a health hazard.
The Govt. of India should come out with clear expert opinion.

Meanwhile, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and National Green Tribunal (NGT) have said that cell-tower radiations are not a “pollutant” or a health hazard if the cell towers strictly adhere to the norms that have been laid down by World Health Organization (WHO) and the department of telecommunication (DoT).

This obviously means that the radiation from the cell towers should not only be routinely checked by the concerned agencies, but the reports should be made available online.