BMC Inhuman, Says Pregnant Woman
Daksha Vinjuda, 24, couldn’t control her tears as a civic demolition squad tore down portions of her third-floor residence at C-block Tulsiwadi municipal staff quarter in Mahalaxmi on Wednesday. “How inhuman can they be! They destroyed my medical files,” said the eight-month pregnant woman.
With hundreds of policemen standing guard, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) carried out an eviction and demolition drive at the municipal staff quarter. The building razed on Wednesday was one of the 20-plus housing societies and slums earmarked to be developed under the BMC’s multi-crore Tulsiwadi scheme. More than 3200 families, including 724 conservancy workers, will be rehabilitated in the 74,536 sq-metre project.
Vinjuda claimed that the demolition squad destroyed all medical files related to her pregnancy. “We were cooking food when they arrived. Before we could pack our belongings, they started evicting us,” said Ganga, Vinjuda’s mother-in-law. The 52-year-old added, “Two of my grandchildren were taking the final exams, which won’t be over before April 10. After the demolition squad did its job, their books and study materials were nowhere to be found.”
Previously when the BMC had sent in its demolition team on March 17, it beat a hasty retreat following strong protests by the 11 families residing in the C-block of the municipal quarters. On Wednesday, however, the civic team came fully geared for the operation. Assistant Municipal Commissioner Ramesh Pawar said that 11 separate squads, each comprising an engineer, on police officer, five labourers and five constables, carried out the job.
Pawar claimed that the team didn’t face much opposition from the residents. However, there were many like the Vinjudas, who complained that the police and the BMC men forced them to move out of their houses. “We are municipal employees. Pawar threatened to have us suspended from work if we did not comply with the orders,” said Pravin Vanel, a conservancy worker with the C-ward.
Pawar, however, refuted the charge. “They agreed to move out on their own. They were given transit accommodation and the rent for the period in transit by the developer (M/s Mangal Shrusti Grihanirman Private Limited),” he said. He, instead, blamed them for holding up the project. “Some 192 families had voluntarily moved to the transit shelter about year ago. Only 11-odd families residing in the C-block and 12 families from the previously demolished B-block were refusing to vacate.”
Vanel questioned the decision to undertake demolition work despite the Railways having issued stop work notices for construction of the rehabilitation component. The notices were issued last year as the new structures would have come up within 30 metres of Mahalaxmi station.
“The demolition was undertaken at the developer’s behest,” Vanel alleged. But a senior building proposal engineer refuted it, saying, “The developer gave a written undertaking that no structure will be constructed within 30 metres of the station, following which the Railways vacated the stay on Wednesday.”
YP Singh, lawyer of the protestors, said, “It was illegal on the civic body’s part to undertake demolition under section 354 of the BMC Act as this was a dilapidated municipal building. They should have invoked section 105A that provides special procedures to evict occupants of BMC buildings.”