Bombay HC orders BMC to pay Rs 50 lakh compensation kin of 2015 hotel fire

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday ordered the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation BMC to pay Rs 50 lakh each as compensation to the family of eight victims who died in a fire outbreak at a hotel in 2015 marking its biggest failure reported the PTIA massive fire broke out inside Hotel City Kinara in Kurla area of Mumbai killing eight people on October 16 2015 The deceased included seven students aged between 1820 and the eighth victim was a 31yearold design engineer from Virar The high court was hearing the petition filed by parents of the victims looking for justice against the Lokayuktarsquos February 2017 order which dismissed their complaint seeking a probeThe Lokayukta while dismissing their pleas noted that compensation of Rs 1 lakh each was disbursed The families sought the enhancement of the compensation amountThe Bombay High Court in its judgment on Tuesday ordered the BMC to pay Rs 50 lakh to the families of each of the victims within 12 weeksDue to the failure of the BMC in taking action the illegality in Kinara continued unabated and ultimately led to the fire and the loss of life A bench of Justices B P Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla said it was lsquoshockingrsquo that the BMC failed to initiate any action against the hotel despite being aware that it did not have requisite permission from the fire department Had the BMC taken prompt action then the fire incident would not have definitely not occurred the court notedThe bench held The negligence and breach of statutory duties by the BMC is a proximate cause of the fire and the civic body can be held vicariously liable for the acts of commission and omission of its officialsThe bench also mentioned that the loss of life of the eight people had a huge impact on their families and has violated their right to life under Article 21 of the ConstitutionThis violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners and their kin under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been caused as a direct result of the negligence and breach of statutory duties on the part of BMC the court notedAccording to the court order the hotel had violated several terms of licence this includes operation of a service area on the mezzanine floor which is supposed to be a storage area It further mentioned that the hotel did not have a noobjection certificate NOC from the fire departmentThe court also emphasised that Kinara had acquired an eating housing licence without getting the NOC from the fire departmentThis in our view was one of the most egregious breaches committed not only by the owner and operator of Kinara but also by Respondent No2 by issuing an eating house licence to Kinara without obtaining any fire NOC it observedWhen the fire broke out these eight victims were seated on the mezzanine floor and they diedThese breaches increased the danger of fire in Kinara the court said adding the BMC was in gross negligence and has acted totally in breach of its statutory dutiesThe hotel also stored multiple gas cylinders which is prohibited The court also highlighted that the civic officers faced no real consequences for their ignorance that could have prevented the fire at Kinara which led to the death of eight peopleThe court in this order stated that the matter is serious and concerns about the public safety and implementation of higher standards of care to be imposed on the authoritiesWhen activities are hazardous and are inherently dangerous the statute expects the highest degree of care and if someone is injured because of such activities the State and its officials are liable even if they could establish that there was no negligence and that it was not intentional the court saidThe court also mentioned that BMC was well aware about the alarming condition of the hotel as it had received several complaints and multiple inspections were carried outEarlier today the Mumbai civic body informed the court that it could not be held liable to pay any compensation to the families of the victims and that the hotel owner should be directed to pay compensationIt argued that after the fire a departmental inquiry was initiated against four civic officials of whom two were found guilty of negligence and an appropriate penalty was imposed on themWith inputs from PTI