Introduction:

In a legal skirmish between the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and the Union of India (Railways), the applicability of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act provisions to hoardings on Railway land took center stage. The dispute unfolded as the High Court granted relief to Railways, exempting them from certain municipal regulations. However, MCGM, aggrieved by this decision, brought the case before the Supreme Court, seeking a reversal of the High Court’s verdict.

Arguments:

The legal tussle ensued with both sides presenting their arguments fervently. MCGM, represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, emphasized the Corporation’s jurisdiction under not only the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act but also the Disaster Management Act. Rohatgi highlighted the imperative for hoardings to adhere to specific size and structural stability standards, citing safety concerns. Conversely, Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee, representing Railways, defended their position, asserting that Railways followed stringent processes, including obtaining structural stability certificates from reputable institutions like IITs, to ensure hoardings’ safety. Banerjee refuted MCGM’s jurisdictional claims and dismissed the significance of hoarding size, underscoring the primacy of structural stability.

Court’s Judgement:

The Supreme Court, cognizant of the gravity of the matter, directed all concerned parties to prevent any untoward incidents involving hoardings, especially amidst the onset of the monsoon season. While the bench sought clarification on the jurisdictional aspects and the circumstances surrounding the tragic Ghatkopar incident, it listed the case for further proceedings.