“You Do Not Care About The Poor”: Bombay High Court Raps Civic Bodies Over Construction Workers' Safety Amid Air Pollution Crisis

Update: 2025-12-23 07:20 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

While hearing a suo motu PIL concerning worsening air pollution in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday came down heavily on the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), questioning the lack of concrete measures to protect construction site workers who are exposed to hazardous air conditions.A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

While hearing a suo motu PIL concerning worsening air pollution in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday came down heavily on the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), questioning the lack of concrete measures to protect construction site workers who are exposed to hazardous air conditions.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad expressed serious dissatisfaction with the functioning of the MPCB, observing that its officials appeared to be “only collecting data and doing almost nothing” on the ground.

During the hearing, the Chief Justice questioned the efficacy of AQI monitoring devices installed across the city and the role of MPCB personnel beyond data collection. Senior Advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, appearing for the MPCB, submitted that he would need to verify the issue with officials. This prompted a sharp response from the Bench.

“You do not care about the poor,” the Chief Justice remarked, pointing to the plight of construction workers. When counsel responded that this was not the case, the Bench retorted, “That is what is happening… They have nothing for the workers… At least a mask is required.”

The Court reminded the advocates appearing for the MPCB and the BMC that environmental protection is not merely a statutory or professional obligation but a constitutional one.

“Before being an officer of this Court, you are a citizen. Protecting the environment is your fundamental duty,” the Chief Justice observed.

As directed earlier, BMC Municipal Commissioner Bhushan Gagrani was present in Court. The Bench questioned him on whether he had personally reviewed the situation on the ground and from when. The responses failed to satisfy the Court.

Expressing displeasure, the Chief Justice remarked, “Tell us the last time when you left your office and visited sites across the city or conducted surprise visits. It appears you do not have any data with you. There is serious objection to your conduct. It appears that you wake up only after this Court takes cognisance.”

On being informed that the BMC had issued 433 show-cause notices and served stop-work notices on 148 construction sites, the Chief Justice clarified that the Court was not against development.

“We do not want the work to stop. Let development continue. All we want is compliance with guidelines,” the Bench said, adding that breaches far outweighed compliance across the city.

The Court noted that even during routine travel, it came across 20–25 construction sites showing no compliance with pollution-control norms. The only site showing basic compliance, according to the Bench, was a major project near the Mumbai airport, and that too only in respect of installing 35-feet metal sheets.

Directing immediate action, the Chief Justice said, “Take your Commissioner around the city and see how many sites are complying. Hold meetings, review data, but bring some solution by tomorrow morning.”

The Bench further instructed the MPCB, “By tomorrow, the very first thing we want to know is how you will protect construction site workers.”

The matter has been adjourned to tomorrow, Wednesday, December 24.

Tags:    

Similar News