09 August,2024 07:25 AM IST | Mumbai | Sameer Surve
The site of the Ghatkopar hoarding collapse on May 13. Pic/Atul Kamble
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has prepared a draft hoarding policy, which is mandatory for all government bodies. The civic body and government body concerned is to split revenue from hoardings 50-50, according to the draft.
The policy mentions places where setting up billboards is prohibited, such as roads, and makes it compulsory for contractors to obtain insurance coverage. The civic body began preparing a fresh policy for hoardings after 17 lives were lost and around people were 70 injured in Ghatkopar East following a hoarding collapse on May 13. It has decided to seek suggestions and objections from citizens.
According to the draft, BMC has decided to make insurance coverage ranging from Rs 5 lakh to Rs 1 crore compulsory based on the size of the hoarding. Also, the maximum dimensions of billboards allowed are 40 feet by 40 feet, while the hoarding will be removed three months after the expiry of the permit. Previously, the window was six months. An NOC of the land owner is also required for setting up hoardings, the policy mentions.
According to the policy, hoarding will be strictly prohibited on terraces while pasting commercial advertisements on compound walls, dead walls, medians, footpaths, traffic islands and the gantry of bridges will be banned. Also, no hoarding will be permitted near high-tension wires.
ALSO READ
NHRC demands accountability from BMC over manual scavenging violations
'Mumbai Police's EOW must probe BMC road contracts under Eknath Shinde govt'
Mumbai faces 15 per cent water cut on Dec 14-15
Debris dumping in Lokhandwala lake: SHRC summons chief secretary
IIT-Bombay inspects Dahisar cement concretisation road project
Submission of structural stability reports issued by the BMC is mandatory. Also, if advertising is put up on a building with a glass façade, it is mandatory to get approval from the civic building proposal department as well as a no-objection certificate from the Mumbai Fire Brigade. Senior licence inspectors are expected to visit the sites of hoardings that are larger than 200 square feet.
The BMC had appointed a special committee comprising civic officials and experts from IIT Bombay among other organisations to draft the policy.
"No agency, without permission in writing from the BMC, shall erect, exhibit, fix or retain any advertisement by means of banners, boards or flags," the policy mentions. Banners or hoardings set up without permission are punishable under Section 471 of the BMC Act, 1888 as well as the Maharashtra Prevention of Defacement of Property Act, 1995. Punishment includes imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or a fine which may extend to Rs 2,000 or both.
"No permission shall be granted on the premises of the corporation and government building, public places or roads. However, exemptions can be considered for certain events by the municipal commissioner, for example, events organised by the government, events organised by the corporation, or any other event as deemed fit by the commissioner," the policy reads. Also, in case of any accident, the advertiser shall be solely liable for all criminal actions, claims or damages of any nature.
"All political parties can display a non-illuminated banner, or board on their party offices located in private premises and no permission is required for the display of such advertisement. Board displaying information regarding the name of the project, duration of the project, name of contractor, name of Member of Parliament, Member of Legislative Assembly/Councillors and constituency can be displayed. However, no photographs/pictures of Member of Parliament/Member of Legislative Assembly Councillors shall be displayed (sic)," it mentions.
The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a plea filed by advertising firm director Bhavesh Bhinde, arrested in the Ghatkopar hoarding collapse case, in which he had claimed the incident was an "act of God" and his arrest was illegal.
A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande said it has not found any legal infirmity and no impairment in the procedure mandated while arresting a person.
"We find no legal infirmity. The ground of illegal arrest and detention by the petitioner is nothing but a faux. There is no impairment in the procedure. The petition is dismissed," the court said.
The bench said the procedural safeguards, which are indefeasible and receive recognition through the constitution, which have considered liberty of the citizen to be of paramount importance, is not impaired in any manner.
Bhinde had sought to quash the First Information Report (FIR) against him, claiming that the incident, which occurred on May 13, was an "act of God" and that he should not be held responsible.
He is charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder and is currently in judicial custody. He had sought release on interim bail pending the hearing of his plea.
