BMC's Action Against Kangana Ranaut: A Legal or Public Relations Move?
The Shiv Sena-controlled Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has started the demolition of alleged structural violations at actor Kangana Ranaut's office in Mumbai. This move follows a series of events that have raised questions about the motives behind the civic body's actions. This article will explore the background, implications, and potential outcomes of the BMC's decision.
Why did the civic body take the action?
The BMC issued a notice to Kangana Ranaut on Tuesday, citing illegal structural violations under section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act 1888. The notice demanded a reply within 24 hours and warned of potential action if the reply was not satisfactory. However, Ranaut's legal team sought an additional seven days to respond, leading the BMC to proceed with the demolition on Wednesday. This move has ignited a bitter exchange between Ranaut and the Shiv Sena, which is known for its assertive stance on environmental and infrastructure issues in the city.
Can the civic body take drastic action like demolition?
Section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act 1888 provides the BMC with the authority to stop and demolish illegal constructions after 24 hours of issuing a notice. The cost of the demolition falls on the violator, as mandated by the law. This legal framework allows the BMC to take swift action against such violations, ensuring compliance with municipal regulations.
What are the exact violations?
The BMC identified 14 specific violations at Ranaut's Pali Hill office. These include converting a toilet into an office cabin, constructing a kitchen in the storeroom, and erecting an illegal pantry on the ground floor. Other violations noted were the presence of a wooden partition in the living room, changing the orientation of the staircase, enclosing the balcony, and relocating the main gate. Any structural changes or deviations from the approved plan by the civic body can result in legal action.
Is this the same action the BMC takes in all such cases? Is demolition only action?
Section 354A empowers the BMC to issue a notice to the violator and take action if the response is unsatisfactory. The competent officer can take measures deemed appropriate by them. While demolition is one form of action that can be taken, the BMC also has the authority to issue fines or impose penalties on the violator. This flexible approach allows the BMC to choose the most suitable course of action based on the specific violation and the violator's response.
What's next?
According to the BMC, the demolition efforts were completed by Wednesday afternoon. The civic body has stated that further legal action will be taken against Ranaut. Ranaut has also approached the courts and moved legal proceedings against the BMC's action. This legal battle highlights the complexities and potential consequences of such civic interventions.
The decision by the BMC to demolish the alleged illegal structures has sparked a public relations war, with various stakeholders interpreting the action through different lenses. For some, it is a stringent enforcement of municipal rules, while for others, it is an overreach by a political party-controlled civic body.
This case underscores the delicate balance between legal enforcement and public relations in urban management. As the legal and public relations aspects continue to unfold, all eyes will be on the outcome of this incident and its implications for future civic actions in Mumbai.