Mumbai: Slum dweller stands in way of dilapidated building’s demolition

A single slum dweller in Kandivli West is thwarting the demolition of the Kunti Deep Society which the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation BMC identified as dilapidated in 2018 Fifteen residents who moved out after the water and power supply to the building was cut in 2021 are frustrated about not being able to return to their homesThe groundplusfourstorey Kunti Deep Society building was constructed in 1981 The civic body in 2018 categorised the building as C1 dilapidated and dangerous for habitatneeds to be immediately vacated But as members continued to occupy the premises the BMC disconnected the water supply and even the electric connection was severed Following the discontinuation of the essential services 11 flat owners and four shop owners vacated the premises and shifted to rented accommodation in the same vicinity with the hope that they would reenter their own homes in the next three to five yearsDeepak Shah chairman of the society left and resident Pravin DaveHowever three years after vacating the building the structure tagged as dangerous still stands on the plot as a slum dweller on a private society plot adjacent to the building is allegedly hindering the pulling down of the building With no sign of relief the society members are now planning to escalate their plight through social media and are even contemplating protesting on the streetslsquoStructure poses threatrsquoDeepak Shah chairman of the society claimed that civic administration ensured that genuine taxpayers were evacuated from the building but the same agency is dragging its feet when it comes to acting against those who are creating hurdles for the demolition of the dilapidated structureShah said ldquoThe dangerous structure is on the main road The street is used by several local residents commuters and even schoolgoing children If the building is not pulled down but collapses on its own I am sure it will lead to a fatal mishap In that case who should be held responsible for the accident It shouldnrsquot be the society or the developerrdquo Around 80 square feet of the slum needs to be vacated as part of safety measures while pulling down the structure Building members claim that the occupier of the slum is refusing to cooperateAs per the records there are five slum occupants on the plot adjacent to the building Of these five four have vacated the area ldquoIn 2014 the BMC declared the slum unit illegal and even issued a notice in this regard The order was challenged in court and a stay was obtained Now when this slum needs to be vacated in the larger interest of society the owner is not vacating the premises despite receiving an assurance that she would be allotted a flat in the proposed new building She has rejected the proposal on the ground that they want a commercial unit and not a flat in the buildingrdquo Shah addedApart from the public the slum dweller herself is said to be at risk ldquoThere is a possibility of material falling on these dwellings which could lead to property damage and danger to human liferdquo said a society memberIntervention soughtSuch is the frustration of the society members that a flat owner raised the issue on social media seeking the intervention of senior police and BMC officials ldquoDespite being taxpaying citizens we are forced to be homeless merely because of an encroacher One slum dweller is putting the brakes on the demolition of a dangerous structure The thought of being homeless is taking an emotional toll on usrdquo 62yearold Pravin Dave saidThe subengineer attached to the building and factory department of R South ward did not respond to middayrsquos calls However it is learnt that civic administration had exhibited its concern that one cannot rule out the possibility of a major mishap if the building collapses due to heavy rains gusty winds or any other reasons In fact the society appointed contractors with the BMCrsquos permission to pull down the building But following objections by the police they stopped the work and fined the workerOther sideThe slum dweller Panna Monani owns the tenement Her son Ritesh refuted the charges that they are creating obstacles for the demolition The family further stated that they were willing to cooperate with society and the developer on the condition that they get a commercial establishment in the proposed redeveloped structure as their existing grocery shop is a commercial establishment ldquoI have not asked for an extra inch of land My only demand is that I should be allotted a commercial space whose size is equivalent to my current shoprdquo Ritesh stated and alleged that a few days back an attempt was made to carry out the demolition without taking precaution and proper safety measures ldquoBut as we complained to the police the work was stoppedrdquo he saidDeveloper SpeakThe developer had entered into an agreement with four slum dwellers but only one of them is trying to exploit the situation as they are aware that without their cooperation the building cannot be demolished The manager of the developer said ldquoOn record the BMC has found them to be illegal dwellers but to save their structures they allegedly annexed the adjoining building shop assessment copy and obtained a stay due to want of a reply and written statement from the BMC The structure owned by Monani was a residential property maliciously made commercial to seek undue advantage Also if considered so can a person become a legal owner of the property just by paying assessments We out of courtesy have offered them a 300sqft flat to address the delay and legal complexitiesrdquo1981Year building was constructed