On Monday, the Bombay High Court criticized the Maharashtra government for delaying the allocation of land for the construction of a new court building in suburban Bandra. The court emphasized the poor condition of the existing structure in south Mumbai, stating that the lives of judicial officers were at risk due to its deteriorating state.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor expressed displeasure with the state government for dragging its feet on the issue, and said it does not want to create an "unsavoury situation". During the proceedings, the bench addressed a petition filed by lawyer Ahmed Abdi, alleging non-compliance by the government with the Bombay High Court's 2018 directive regarding land allocation for the construction of the court building.
In the previous year, the government conveyed to the bench its approval to allocate 30 acres of land for the construction of a new high court building in Bandra. It was indicated that the process was underway to make necessary amendments in the state revenue records, following which possession of the land would be transferred. However, during Monday's hearing, Additional government pleader Abhay Patki informed the court about the presence of existing structures on the proposed land, which are currently serving as residences for government officers. Patki further stated that the government would need to arrange alternate accommodation for these personnel before proceeding with the land allocation. Responding to this, the bench inquired whether there was a plan in place to vacate the entire land.
The condition of the Bombay High Court building is well known. The condition of this building and also the annexe building is bad. Our officers work there. Their lives are in peril. They work in dangerous conditions. There is no space for storage no space to walk the stairs are in poor condition, Chief Justice Upadhyaya said.
The court then asked why there was no change in the revenue records till now. The government knew long back that the land was not vacant when it was earmarked for the high court building. Why was nothing done for so long? What is the plan for relocation? the bench questioned.