Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has issued notice to the BMC commissioner and two senior officers over non-removal of encroachments for widening of a road in Mandala Village on Sion-Trombay stretch despite a Nov 18 order granting it six months time to do so.Acting chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad on June 12 directed the commissioner to personally file a reply. “After considering the reply of the commissioner, we would decide as to whether contempt of court proceedings need to be initiated against respondent nos. 1 (BMC through the commissioner) to 3 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act,’’ they said. The two officers are the assistant municipal commissioner of M(E) and M (W) wards.A local resident had moved HC last year aggrieved by BMC’s inaction despite multiple complaints. In 1992, the land was donated by the department of atomic energy (DAE) to BMC to develop a 50 ft wide road. In Feb 2016, NOC was also granted for development on DAE land. Between 2010-2011, BMC issued seven notices for removal of encroachments near BARC compound wall. Some 192 trees were cut to facilitate road widening. However, the BMC laid only a 30ft-wide road. The petition said due to encroachments, even a fire tender cannot enter the narrow road. The fire department too communicated this fact to the BMC. The petition urged the HC to direct BMC to complete construction of the entire 50ft-wide road.On Nov 18, 2025, HC granted BMC 180 days, of which 90 days were to be utilised for removal of encroachments. The petition was disposed of and listed on June 12 for recording compliance.At the hearing, the judges said in spite of granting time and in the backdrop of BMC issuing notices in 2010-11 and axing 192 trees, “nothing substantial has been done.” “For the last 16 years, the corporation has apparently turned a blind eye to the encroachment, and despite our directions, hardly any steps have been taken,” they lamented, adding that the BMC “did not even have courtesy towards the court” to move an application for seeking an extension of time. “Our order has been practically ignored,’’ they said.BMC’s advocate said a decision has been taken in principle for a 40ft-wide road. The petitioner’s advocate, Harshad Sathe, said the land was given for a 50ft road. “In view of the above, we are compelled to suo motu issue notice” to the commissioner and AMCs, the judges said and posted the hearing on July 7.
