SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S. SONAK, JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
 
Mr D.V.M. Patel and Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra, through the Government Pleader and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 2931 of 2018
Decided On : 10-07-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Ms Ferzana Behramkamdin, with Ms Kalyani Deshmukh, i/b, FZB & Associates.
For the Respondents: Ms Manisha Gawde, AGP, Ms. Kavita N. Solunke, Mr Mayur Khandeparkar, with Ms Heenal Wadhava, i/b, The Law Point.

The court emphasized the necessity of protecting heritage structures from developmental impacts while allowing the petitioners to seek further legal remedies concerning any damage post-construction.

Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 - Societies Registration Act, 1860 - Heritage Conservation - Writ Petition regarding the protection of the Grade II A Heritage Structure of the J. N. Petit Institute that suffered damage due to construction activities of Metro Line III - The petitioners claim damages for negligence and seek restoration of a fallen limestone finial. (Paras 1-3, 13, 19, 71)

(B) Heritage Protection - The Court emphasized the importance of safeguarding heritage structures, affirming the need for compliance with the recommendations of the Expert Committee for ensuring the preservation of heritage buildings. (Paras 40-44, 54-56).

(C) Scope of Judicial Review - The Court clarified that post-construction concerns should be addressed through appropriate procedures without prejudice to either party's claims. (Paras 66, 70, 71)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners are trustees of a public charitable trust operating a heritage library established in 1856. Concerns were raised regarding vibrations from Metro construction affecting their Grade II A Heritage Structure, leading to the collapse of a limestone finial. (Paras 3, 19, 71)

Findings of Court:
The Court ordered MMRCL to reconstruct the fallen finial at its expense, contingent upon the petitioners providing necessary documents and permissions. (Paras 63, 71)

Issues: The main issues addressed included the alleged negligence of MMRCL regarding the protection of the heritage structure and the appropriateness of response measures to potential damage during metro construction activities. (Paras 38, 71)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the provisions of heritage conservation must prevail, and despite the completion of construction, the petitioners maintain the right to seek further recompense if necessary. (Paras 40, 70)

Result: Writ Petition disposed with directions for reconstruction and preservation measures.

Table of Content
1. trustees operating a heritage building sought legal protection. (Para 1)
2. public trust status of the building. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. concerns about damage from metro construction. (Para 6 , 12 , 14 , 19)
4. pre-construction concerns address impact on the heritage structure. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
5. vibrations from construction activities raise significant concerns. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
6. monitoring instruments and care requirements. (Para 22 , 23 , 34)
7. expert committee intervention to ensure heritage safety. (Para 25 , 26 , 29)
8. legal obligation to protect heritage structures. (Para 40 , 50 , 52)
9. restoration obligations set for the fallen limestone finial. (Para 63 , 64 , 66)
10. pmmrc's obligation to restore fallen structures. (Para 71 , 72)

JUDGMENT :

(M.S. Sonak, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The Petitioners are the Trustees of the Jamsetjee Nesserwanjee Petit Institute, a public charitable trust registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The trust inter alia has founded and operates the J. N. Petit Reading Room and Library since 1856.

3. This petition concerns the building known as the “J. N. Petit Institute,” along with an arcade constructed on the land bearing C.S. No. 702 of Fort Division, in the Neo-Gothic Revival style, dated 1898. This structure features various ornamental, decorative, and distinctive elements, including a circular staircase tower, bouquets, finials, and tower turrets that shape its silhouette. The petitioners have stated that this building has an extremely shallow foundation, only around three metres deep, and extends beyond the superstructure of the building. It is acknowledged that this building is a Grade II A Heritage Structure and is regarded as one of the landmark properties along D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai.

4. The Petitioners have pleaded that the said building was renovated in 2014-15 and was conferred the UNESCO Award of Distinction for Cultural Heritage Conservation in 2015.

5. The Petitioners have pleaded that the building has always been and is still used as a Reading Room and library, housing 1,00,000 books, including 2,400 rare books and 12 manuscripts, some of which date back to the 17th Century. The library also houses three collections of newspapers, viz. Jam-e-Jamshed from 1936 onwards, Times of India from 1933 onwards and Mumbai Samachar from 1926 onwards. The Petitioners have pleaded that the building is open to all subscribers to the Library/Reading Room, including the poor and needy citizens, at reasonable and affordable subscription rates. Several poor and needy students use the Library and Reading Room for their studies.

6. Metro Line III was proposed to be aligned along the D. N. Road, Fort. Several objections were raised from various quarters to this alignment, mainly because it would seriously affect the structures or stability of the several heritage structures on either side of this road. Even the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC) objected to this alignment and withheld its No Objection Certificate (NOC) for some time. The MHCC, later, upon being assured that only the tunnelling method would be adopted and that no station, namely the Hutatma Chowk Station, would be constructed at D.N. Road, or that such a station would be built using the cut and cover method, reluctantly agreed to the Metro Line III alignment along D.N. Road.

7. Before the construction work could commence, the contractors engaged by the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (MMRCL) sought the Petitioners’ NOC to allow them to enter the Petitioners’ property to carry out a pre-construction survey, to install building monitoring instruments and allow their representatives to read such monitoring instruments. The Petitioners were also requested to furnish structural/as-built drawings of the said building.

8. By letter dated 22 February 2017, the Petitioners sought som

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top