A three-judge bench on Tuesday also barred payment of salaries to the commissioner’s personal staff, rejected the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) request for another 30 days to act and imposed costs of Rs 5 lakh on the civic body.
Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana found prima facie grounds to question the commissioner’s compliance with directions issued on November 13, 2025, and July 28, 2026. The show-cause notice asks Bhide to explain why contempt action should not follow. No final finding of contempt has yet been made.
The dispute concerns approximately 3,400 square metres in Borivali, earmarked for a bus station and administrative facilities of the Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport undertaking, known as BEST. The court had instructed municipal authorities to secure possession, remove unauthorised occupation through lawful procedures and enable the project to operate.
Tuesday’s order restrains both the municipal corporation and the Maharashtra government from releasing the commissioner’s salary or that of her personal staff while the court considers compliance and the contempt notice. The intervention follows repeated judicial deadlines that the bench said had not produced the required action.
The judges expressed particular dissatisfaction with the corporation’s application seeking four more weeks to complete the eviction process. Municipal lawyers said notices had been served on occupants and hearings conducted, but final decisions remained outstanding. They also referred to civil litigation involving occupants and the need to translate documents written in Marathi.
Justice Bagchi challenged the explanation concerning translation, questioning why municipal officers could not understand Marathi documents. The bench considered the outstanding administrative steps insufficient justification for missing the deadline fixed in July.
Chief Justice Kant raised the possibility of collusion between officials and people occupying the property. His remarks were made while questioning the delay and did not amount to a judicial determination that particular officials had engaged in wrongdoing beyond the alleged disobedience under examination.
The bench refused to extend its timetable despite counsel offering to complete the process within another month. Justice Bagchi told the corporation’s representatives that salary payments would remain withheld through November, making compliance with the court’s directions the immediate priority.
The underlying proceedings have involved a dispute over possession of the Borivali property between the corporation and a private developer. An earlier Supreme Court direction required the developer to hand over the land and an administrative building, while placing responsibility on the municipal authorities to address occupants remaining at the site.
By November 2025, the court was already dissatisfied with the pace of removal. It directed the commissioner to submit a personal affidavit identifying occupants, the notices served on them, their replies and any documents relied upon to claim ownership or tenancy rights. The court also sought details of the municipal verification of those claims.
At the July 28 hearing, the corporation explained that some occupants had challenged eviction notices issued under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, before a civil court. The Supreme Court responded that pending litigation did not automatically prevent enforcement where no interim order restrained the authorities.
The bench accordingly gave the corporation three months to complete the required exercise and file a compliance report. That period expired without the encroachments being removed, leading to Tuesday’s application for additional time and the court’s refusal to grant it.
The contempt notice places the commissioner under a formal obligation to answer the court’s concerns. Such a notice allows the official concerned to present an explanation before the judges decide whether any punitive action is warranted. The salary restriction is an interim coercive direction rather than a final contempt punishment.
The corporation’s position before the bench was that statutory procedures involving notices, hearings and competing occupancy claims still needed to be completed. The judges nevertheless emphasised that those procedures had to be carried out within the deadlines already set, rather than used to justify further postponement.
The Borivali land is intended for BEST, Mumbai’s municipal bus transport undertaking. The unresolved occupation has prevented the authorities from completing the court-directed steps needed to bring the proposed bus station into use under the court’s earlier binding directions.
