Illegality is incurable: HC denies relief to Navi Mumbai man over illegal building

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition filed by a Navi Mumbai resident challenging the demolition of his illegally constructed building and seeking compensation of ₹5 crore from the planning authority. The court reiterated that illegal constructions cannot be legitimised through judicial intervention.

A division bench comprising Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata ruled that “illegality is incurable” and that violations of the law cannot be condoned. The petition was filed by Hanuman Jairam Naik, 54, who claimed to have been residing in his ancestral house on a plot in Navi Mumbai since 1975. Due to its dilapidated condition, he demolished the structure in 2022 and rebuilt a multi-storied building—without obtaining the necessary planning permissions.

Naik, citing illiteracy, admitted to neither seeking permission for the demolition nor securing approvals for the reconstruction from the competent authorities. On July 18, 2022, the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) served him a notice regarding the unauthorised construction, but it went unanswered. Subsequently, he filed a civil suit against the Controller of Unauthorised Constructions, CIDCO, and NMMC to challenge the notice.

On February 15, 2023, the Belapur Civil Court directed all parties to maintain the status quo. However, despite this order, CIDCO’s Controller of Unauthorised Constructions demolished Naik’s building on December 27, 2023, prompting him to move the High Court.

Naik’s counsel, advocate Tapan Thatte, argued that the demolition was unlawful and in violation of the civil court’s directive. He sought orders directing the authorities to reconstruct the demolished structure and restore possession to Naik. He further contended that the officials responsible should be held personally liable for the loss. “Unless personal accountability is fixed on the officers responsible for illegal demolitions, it would be an affront to the fundamental rights of citizens,” Thatte asserted.

However, after reviewing the records, the High Court remained unconvinced by Naik’s arguments. The bench observed that Naik had deliberately chosen to bypass legal procedures under the pretext of illiteracy. He failed to establish ownership over the land or prove any legal standing to claim compensation.

“If he had the means to file civil suits, he certainly could have consulted an architect for legal approvals. Instead, he followed a common misconception that one can first build illegally and then seek regularisation if caught,” the court noted.

The bench also criticised the state government’s failure to curb the rise of unauthorised structures across Maharashtra. “The proliferation of slums and illegal constructions is a result of the state’s inaction. This emboldens individuals like the petitioner, who assume they can construct first and seek permissions later,” it remarked, adding that illiteracy cannot be used as an excuse for violating the law.

The court also considered imposing an exemplary cost of ₹5 lakh on Naik to deter similar petitions aimed at misleading courts. “If such petitions are entertained, it would lead to utter lawlessness,” the bench observed. However, following a specific request by Naik’s lawyer, the court refrained from imposing the penalty.

The verdict serves as a stern warning against unauthorised constructions and reinforces the judiciary’s stance that legal violations cannot be justified post facto.