BMC to reply over ‘illegal’ masjid

The Bombay high court on Monday asked the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to file reply on an PIL alleging that Kinara Masjid, spread over 8,000 sq ft at the gate and off Haji Ali Dargah, is illegal and appropriate action should be taken against it. The collector has already filed reply saying the construction of the masjid is without permission.

The court was hearing a petition filed by advocate Ashish Mehta on behalf of Sahayak, a socio-legal and educational forum, claiming that Haji Ali Kinara Masjid Committee has carried out illegal and unauthorised construction adjacent to the Haji Ali Dargah to the extent of 8,000 sq ft comprising ground plus one floor. According to the petition, the structure is in an area that comes under the Coastal Regulation Zone.

The contention of the petitioner is that the state has issued a Government Resolution on May 5, 2011 wherein it has categorically stated that any illegal construction carried out in or near religious premises has to be demolished if the said construction is built after September 29, 2009.

However, neither the collector nor the BMC took action against the said structure in accordance with the law. The petitioner sought direction from the court for the concerned authorities to take action and file a compliance report.

The petitioner also prayed that the court restrain the Kinara Masjid from using and occupying the said structure till the matter was pending before the court.

According to Mr Mehta, complaints had been made about this by the petitioner to the collector and the BMC, but they were passing the buck between themselves.

The court was informed that the collector has already filed reply saying no permission was sought to construct the said structure while a reply from the Kinara Masjid Committee and the BMC is yet to be filed.

On request of the petitioner the division bench of Justice Shantanu Kemkar and Justice M.S. Karnik allowed the petitioner to serve court notice to the Committee personally so that it could file reply. The court has posted this matter for further hearing on August 30.