Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

A division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V Marne has recently issued a notice in a Public Interest Litigation filed for parking facilities below the bridges and the flyovers in Mumbai Metropolitan Region.

The petitioner, Pradeep Gajraj Bais, approached the high court seeking a parking facility under the bridges where public parking spaces are not available within 200 meters of such bridges and flyovers. 

The plea stated that before 2008, the spaces below the bridge and flyovers were used as parking spaces. However, the then Chief Minister of Maharashtra made an oral statement that such parking should not be allowed as it may cause danger if any car catches fire. 

Subsequently, an order was passed under Section 56 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act 1966 by the government in 2009 and it was directed that parking should not be allowed under flyovers, bridges where public parking space is available within 200 meters, and further, where such public parking is available, on-street parking also should not be allowed.

The present petition stated that on the verbal direction of the Chief Minister, the parking facilities were terminated. The plea stated that Indiabulls Private Limited filed a writ petition for some refund of the deposit for the contract they had undertaken for construction under the bridge wherein the Deputy Director of Town Planning clarified that the order passed under the MRTP would prevail over the Chief Ministers' verbal statement.

The plea stated that the horizontal area of the MMR region is exhausted and the vacant space below the bridges should be used.

"The petitioner submits that the MMR region is one such region where horizontal development has already exhausted and now there is scope only for vertical development with additional FSI. In such circumstances, the Respondent authorities should not waste the huge spaces those are lying vacant beneath the bridges. The smart usage of these open spaces lying vacant for car parking is truly what is supposed to be as a smart city. Therefore, intervention of this Court is necessary," the plea stated.  

The plea further stated that such a parking facility would result in increasing government exchequer from the day-to-day car parking fees as well as from various tenders and government contracts. The said act will economically benefit the state as well as the local self-government, as per the plea.

The petition stated that court interference is required since locals, tourists, or other persons are required to park anywhere in the vicinity sometimes due to unavoidable circumstances. In such cases, heavy fines are imposed with severe consequences, the plea emphasized.

Case Title: Pradeep Gajraj Bais vs State of Maharashtra & Ors.