Why Mumbai's C1 buildings await demolition for years
At least 70 dangerous C1 structures in Mumbai remain vacant due to legal issues and resident objections, hindering their demolition and redevelopment
Mumbai: If you’ve ever wondered why certain buildings and complexes in the city stand vacant for years together, resembling ghost towns, there’s a good chance they are C1 structures – meaning extremely dangerous and unfit for habitation – whose demolition has been stalled owing to legal and procedural tangles and/ or residents who refuse to budge as they have no alternate accommodation.
At present, there are at least 70 such buildings in Mumbai, accounting for a bulk of the 171 buildings designated as C1 structures by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC).
“Each of the 42 buildings are stuck in the process of demolition at some step or the other while another 28 are vacant and stuck in legal battles,” said an officer from BMC’s encroachment department, which oversees C1 buildings and supervises their demolition.
A designated officer from the building and factories department oversees buildings in every ward, said the officer. Once a building is designated as C1, a range of processes need to be completed before it can be demolished.
The first step of getting residents to vacate the building is often the hardest, because they approach the judiciary in most cases, armed with objections or trying to save their homes. Many of the buildings awaiting demolition are embroiled in such cases.
Another step where hurdles emerge is provision of ‘area certificates’, which denote the area each landlord/ tenant has claim to, on the basis of which they are rehabilitated in the redeveloped structure. BMC officials said several checks need to be conducted before such certificates can be provided, which complicates the situation.
“First, we check the approved plans of buildings for measurements. If plans are not there, we check the assessment records. If records are also absent, we have no option but to physically visit and survey the premises,” said the officer quoted earlier. Conflicts arise when area certificates are prepared and handed over to tenants and landlords – sometimes among themselves and sometimes with the BMC. “Such instances take a long time to sort out,” said the officer.
The third major reason demolition of many C1 buildings are stalled is because they come under the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and cannot be demolished by the BMC.
Additionally, while residents can opt to undertake the demolition themselves, it can only happen after they arrive at an agreement with a developer or builder.
“We give them time, but if the building is located beside the road, we ask them to put up barricades to afford some protection to the public,” the officer said.
Appointment of a contractor for demolition and redevelopment is the final step of process, and it is done by floating tenders. This process can take anywhere between seven to 14 days, said officials.
.
Case study #1: Lack of consensus between landlord, tenants
Ram Nagar Trust building, Borivali
Two wings of the ground plus two storeyed Ram Nagar Trust building in Borivali, demarcated as ‘highly dilapidated’ by the BMC, have been awaiting demolition for over six months. But things are in limbo because of a lack of consensus on redevelopment between the landlord and the tenants, who are part owners of the building under the pagdi system.
Built to accommodate Sindhi and Punjabi refugees in the aftermath of the partition, the Ram Nagar Trust building housed 83 families. In 2020, the BMC categorised the building as a C1 structure, which set off a tussle between the tenants and the landlord.
“All 83 tenants were ready for redevelopment. But our landlord, Hinduja, was not very receptive and gave us no indication of what our future homes would be like. So, we blocked the building’s demolition,” said Chirag Chawla, secretary of Ram Nagar Trust, who was born in the building.
The Covid-19 pandemic afforded the residents some time. But the collapse of a four-storeyed building in Borivali in 2022 heightened the tussle, with the BMC issuing fresh notices to residents to vacate the premises. The residents, in turn, moved the sessions court, followed by the high court, which ordered them to vacate the building in January. The court also gave the landlord a year’s time to redevelop or reconstruct the property.
The residents complied with the court order and moved into rented accommodation elsewhere in the city, some going as far as Virar where rents were affordable. But they did not let go of the premises they had called home for decades – instead, they barricaded the building, installed a gate and barred the entry of BMC officials, foreclosing any possibility of demolition.
“Talks with the landlord are moving very slowly and we are yet to receive certificates from the BMC specifying the area of our flats. Till we have some concrete proof of our homes and a mutually agreeable plan for redevelopment, how can we allow the building to be demolished? If there is no building, we will have no grounds to claim any rights,” said Chawla.
If a redevelopment plan does not materialise during talks with the landlord, the residents plan to approach the court again to seek permission to redevelop the building themselves.
“We will wait till the one year allotted by the court for redevelopment is over before taking the next step,” said Chawla.
Case Study #2: Held up by a BEST substation
Calcutta Confectionary and Sitladevi Industrial Estate, Mahim
The Calcutta Confectionary and Sitladevi Industrial Estate in Mahim was a ground plus one storeyed commercial building that housed factories, workshops and business establishments. It was designated as a C1 structure in 2014, which was challenged by the landlord in court. In 2019, following a court order, 80% of the building was demolished barring a portion which houses a BEST substation, also called an electricity transformer, which supplies electricity to neighboring buildings.
“The building had chocolate factories, packaging establishments and furniture workshops,” said Asif Kapadia, caretaker of the building who maintains vigil at the site during the day, from a shed beside the portion of the building that is still standing. A watchman guards the entryway to the building, sealed off with tall, blue metal sheets, round the clock.
“We cannot do anything to the remaining portion till the substation is shifted elsewhere,” said the liaison officer appointed by the landlord, who continues paying rent to the erstwhile tenants to run their factories and establishments elsewhere. Correspondence with BEST regarding shifting of the transformer continues, he explained, with no clear date in sight as to when it will happen.
Meanwhile, in 2020, the tenants approached court, claiming ownership rights to structures adjoining the portion housing the substation, which was partly refuted by the BMC. “It is now up to the court to decide on the next course of action based on documents furnished by tenants. But the case has been stuck for four years due to high pendency rates in our judicial system,” said the liaison officer.
“The landlord is keen to redevelop the building once all the hurdles are cleared, but how and when that will happen is up in the air,” he said.
Case study #3: Ingenious residents reduce load on building
Tin Bungalows, Ghatkopar
Five wings of Tin Bungalows in Ghatkopar, comprising six ground plus one storeyed buildings, were designated as C1 structures in 2020. But the residents, mostly contractural workers and owners of small businesses, did not want to move out of the premises since they were too poor to afford accommodation at market rates elsewhere.
So, they found an ingenious way to stall the demolition their buildings – since the structural audit seemed to indicate that the ground floor was compromised due to the weight of the dilapidated first floor, they pulled down the first floor of all five affected wings. They then secured the roof with metal and tarpaulin sheets strung on bamboo poles to prevent leakage due to rain.
“The load on the structure came down drastically when we pulled down the first floor after the C1 notice was served to us,” said a C wing resident. “Right now, only the ground floor is remaining, where we are living. How is that going to harm us in any way,” he asked.
In August 2023, the residents submitted a letter to the BMC, saying they had dismantled the first floor as per the directions of the structural auditor and would take additional steps to strengthen the structure as required.
The BMC, however, issued fresh notices to residents of the five buildings on June 29, instructing them to vacate the premises within seven days or face forced eviction with the help of police.
“We are living here at our own risk,” said a resident. “Look at us – we live here because we cannot afford to live in a better place. It is our responsibility to protect ourselves. Even the landlord is fighting against this in court because the BMC keeps issuing notices to vacate the place.”