Division Bench Reprimands MBMC Officials for Acting on BJP MLA Narendra Mehta’s Letter Despite Court Stay
High Court Questions Civic Body Over Political Request
The Bombay HC Contempt Notice arose after civic officials allegedly ignored an active judicial stay. The Bombay High Court questioned the Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation (MBMC) over its actions. Officials had issued stop-work orders against a real estate developer after receiving a letter from an MLA.
A Division Bench heard the contempt petition. It comprised Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad.
The Bench strongly criticised the civic administration. It questioned why officials followed a political request despite an existing High Court order.
The Court asked whether the civic body considered an MLA above the High Court. It also expressed concern over the apparent disregard of its directions.
Dispute Over Developer’s Project
The dispute involves Grandbuild Land Developers LLP. The company is constructing residential towers and a primary school on reserved land in Bhayandar.
The project faced administrative issues after BJP MLA Narendra Mehta sent letters seeking changes to the sanctioned plans.
Following these communications, the MBMC issued show-cause notices to the developer.
The developer then approached the Bombay High Court. It sought to quash the notices issued by the civic authorities.
On April 27, the High Court granted interim relief to the company. The Court restrained the MBMC from taking coercive or adverse action against the developer.
MBMC Issues Stop-Work Notices Despite Stay
Despite the interim protection, MBMC Commissioner Radhabinod Sharma approved a stop-work notice on May 4.
The notice reportedly referred to the MLA’s letter as the basis for the decision.
The municipal body later issued another stop-work order on June 3.
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) subsequently took action against the project. On July 21, it issued a show-cause notice and froze the project’s bank accounts.
The developer then initiated contempt proceedings before the Bombay High Court.
Developer Alleges Willful Disobedience
Senior Advocate Birendra Saraf appeared for the developer. He argued that the municipal administration had openly disregarded the High Court’s directions.
During the hearing, Commissioner Radhabinod Sharma offered an oral apology.
He claimed that he did not know about the High Court’s stay when he approved the notices.
The Commissioner also undertook to withdraw the adverse notices immediately.
Following this assurance, Saraf asked the Court to defer coercive contempt action for the time being.
Court Seeks Formal Explanation
The High Court issued a simple show-cause notice to the MBMC Commissioner. It directed him to submit a formal explanation through an affidavit.
The Bombay HC Contempt Notice requires the Commissioner to explain the circumstances surrounding the alleged violation.
The Bench also directed the MBMC to inform MahaRERA about the withdrawal of its notices.
The civic body must communicate this information within one week. This step would help MahaRERA take appropriate action regarding the project’s frozen bank accounts.
The proceedings underline the binding nature of judicial orders. Administrative authorities must comply with court directions unless a competent court modifies or sets them aside.
