The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Technical Advisory Committee and the reliance on structural audit reports to determine the condition of buildings and the necessity for demolition.

JUDGMENT

1. The matter is placed on board on the praecipe filed by the Petitioners' Advocate in view of the notice issued by the Municipal Corporation on the ground that the buildings in question which belongs to Municipal Corporation has been declared under C-1 category.

2. Mr. Kapadia, learned Counsel for the Petitioner invited our attention to some of the reports submitted by the structural engineers/auditors and would submit that buildings in questions are not required to be demolished as the same can be repaired. Those reports relied upon by the Petitioners clearly indicates that buildings would fall under C-2 A category and not C-1 category. The learned Counsel invited our attention to order passed by this Court on 12 th December, 2017 directing the Municipal Corporation to refer the case of the subject buildings to Technical Advisory Committee with a direction to comply with the direction/guidelines issued in paragraph 9 of the decision of this Court in case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (2014) SCC Online Bom. 666.

3. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that though the Technical Advisory Committee was directed to comply with various directions in paragraph 9 of the said judgment prescribing the guidelines the Technical Advisory Committee did not carry out any test and once again declared the buildings in question under C-1 category. He submits that three reports produced on record by the Petitioners are contrary to the said TAC report.

4. It is submitted that the Municipal Corporation has not approved the proposal of the redevelopment of the buildings in question till date and these occupants who are staying in these buildings since last 95 years thus shall not be asked to vacate by the Municipal Corporation.

5. Mr. Kapadia also invited our attention to report dated 12 th August, 2018 submitted by VJTI and more particularly paragraph 6 thereafter and would submit that the said report was submitted by the VJTI after passing of the last order passed by this Court directing TAC to carry out test in compliance with the principles laid down by this Court. He submits that the said report clearly indicates that structures in question are stable and can be repaired and was rightly classified as C-2B category.

6. Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation on the other hand, relied on various orders passed by this Court. He submits that the TAC has complied with the said order passed by this Court and opined that buildings cannot be repaired and will have to be demolished. He invited our attention to the order dated 3 rd September, 2019 and more particularly paragraph 4 and would submit that this Court have made it clear that there was no question of old and dilapidated municipal buildings housing the tenants continuing at the site for they do not only pose a threat to the life of those occupying but those residing in the neighbourhood or passing by such buildings. Therefore, these buildings ought to be pulled down and that cannot be resisted at any cost. He submits that Municipal Corporation has already submitted a proposal for redevelopment of the buildings and said proposal is pending before the Improvement Committee. The draft tender is already prepared.

7. The learned Counsel states that developer has already made proposal for development of the said buildings. He submits that the said proposal would be submitted by the Improvement Committee at the earliest and appropriate decision in this regard would be taken. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation that Corporation has also offered temporary alternate accommodation to the occupants of the buildings in question at S. G. Chemicals premises, Vashi Naka, Chembur. The Petitioners however, are not vacating the tenaments though offered in the year 2020 itself. He submits that since the redevelopment may be finalized by the Improvement Committee/Corporation, the developer that would be