Explained: Amitabh Bachchan vs BMC showdown

Image: Getty Images

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday disposed of a plea and asked the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to not take any coercive action against Bollywood’s megastar Amitabh Bachchan and his actor-politician wife Jaya Bachchan. The plea was filed in regards to the acquisition of a part of the land where their Juhu bungalow ‘Pratiksha’ existed, for the purpose of widening the road.

What is the Amitabh Bachchan vs BMC matter?

In the year 2017, the BMC has issued two notices to the Bachchans on April 20. These notices said that their residential bungalow ‘Pratiksha’ fell within the regular line of a street that the BMC needed to widen, and therefore intended to take possession of the part of Bachchan’s bungalow which included the wall.

Upon receiving the notices, Amitabh Bachchan and Jaya Bachchan set their representatives to visit the BMC office in order to enquire about the notices as well as to discuss them with the officials. Their representatives also suggested to the officials that they may widen the street on the opposite side of their bungalow which would be easier.

ALSO READ: Amitabh Bachchan sells South Delhi's house; it was Bachchan's family house

Who approached the Bombay High Court first?

On February 17, 2022, Amitabh Bachchan and Jaya Bachchan filed a plea with the Bombay High Court seeking directions to be heard by the BMC chief and also against the acquisition of a part of their plot, notices for which were sent to them in April 2017. The plea was being heard by a division bench of justices RD Dhanuka and SM Modak.

What do the Bachchans have to say? 

In their plea, the Bachchans stated that the BMC had taken no action to implement the notices issued to them for a period of four years and nine months, till January 28, this year. Early this year, the civic body officials on January 28, informed the petitioners verbally that they would be taking action as per the notices issued to them and will shortly acquire the part of the plot, claimed the plea.

They (Bachchans) also claimed that the civic body had not sent out these notices to the other holders of the plots on the same sides. They further said that they assumed the notices issued were dropped which is why they did not file any formal objection. The petitioners also claimed that the notices that the BMC issued to them under section 299 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 were invalid.

ALSO READ: Fans shouldn't miss Amitabh Bachchan's Republic Day wish; many celebs are in splits

The BMC’s version: 

In the notices issued to the Bachchans, BMC said that it needed to acquire a portion of their plot which was falling on the street that they needed to widen. The civic body on May 22, 2021sent a letter to the Mumbai suburban district collector. In the letter, the BMC asked the collector to take “appropriate action on measurement and demarcation” of the Sant Dnyaneshwar Marg; it is the same road on which the Bachchans’ bungalow Prateeksha is situated. BMC in its letter also claimed that the widening of the road will help in easing traffic congestion which will further provide relief to the public.

The court’s order: 

While the double bench of the Bombay High Court disposed of the plea on Wednesday, February 23, it asked the civic body to consider the representation made by the Bachchans within a period of six weeks, further saying that personal hearings can be granted if needed by the civic body chief or the parties to the case. It also asked the BMC to not take any coercive action against the petitioners till three weeks after BMC decides upon their representation. The double bench also granted two weeks to the petitioners to file an additional representation. It said that the civic body chief’s decision has to be made in six weeks after that.