Supreme Court freezes November salary of BMC chief Ashwini Bhide for failing to remove encroachments

Mumbai's municipal commissioner Ashwini Bhide. (Express photo by Ganesh Shirsekar)

THE SUPREME Court on Tuesday issued notice to BMC Commissioner Ashwini Bhide, asking her to show cause why it should not initiate contempt of court proceedings against her for failing to comply with its direction to clear encroachments from land intended for a bus station project in Borivalli, and ordered suspension of her salary for the month of November.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana turned down the BMC’s request for 30 more days to execute the direction of removing encroachments and imposed a penalty of Rs 5 lakh on the municipal body.

The SC bench noted that its earlier directions were yet to be acted upon and wondered if there was any collusion between the officials and encroachers.

The CJI said, “This is an absolutely mischievous breach of the directions of the Supreme Court, with the direct connivance and support of the encroachers.” He warned that the court can put it all down in the order if the officials do not mend their ways.

Justice Bagchi told the BMC counsel, “You will not be drawing a salary till the 1st of December 2026. So comply before that. You come here and then you can draw your salary.”

Dismissing the BMC’s prayer for further extension of time, the CJI said: “Let them sit in the midnight and pass the orders. Let them know how to work.”

The contempt application was moved by the project proponent, who alleged that the municipal authorities had failed to clear the encroachments.

Story continues below this ad

Hearing the case on November 13 last year, the SC had said that “as regard to the removal of unauthorised encroachments, prima facie, we find that the municipal authorities are attempting to wriggle out of their previous stand and responsibility.” However, before initiating contempt proceedings, it granted one opportunity to the Commissioner “to file” a “personal affidavit along with (i) the names and particulars of the occupants; (ii) the copies of the notices issued to them; (iii) the copies of their reply, if any, received pursuant to such notices; (iv) the documents relied upon by the occupants in support of their plea of tenancy or ownership, if any; and (v) any enquiry/exercise undertaken by the Municipal Authorities to verify the genuineness of such documents.”

While hearing it again on July 28, 2026, the BMC said although notices against the encroachers were issued under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, most of them dragged the corporation into litigation before the civil court. The bench, however, said, “In our considered opinion, in the absence of any interim stay by the civil court, nothing precludes the corporation from taking those notices for removal of unauthorised possession to their logical conclusion(s).” It directed that the needful be done in three months and a compliance report be submitted.