Bombay HC pulls up TMC officer over unauthorised hospital in residential tower
Bombay High Court
Thane: The functioning of a hospital inside a residential flat without civic permissions has come under sharp judicial scrutiny, raising concerns that extend beyond zoning laws to issues of patient safety, infrastructure standards, and regulatory compliance.
The matter came up before the Bombay High Court, which expressed shock over a Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) officer seeking additional time to consider a regularisation application for a hospital functioning in a residential society, despite admitting that it lacked mandatory permissions. The bench of Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge and Abhay J. Mantri initiated contempt proceedings against the officer, observing that a previous court order had not been complied with.
As per a media report in The Indian Express, the case arose from a writ petition filed by New Devashish Co-operative Housing Society Ltd, which challenged the continued operation of a hospital inside a flat in a residential tower building. The society also alleged that LPG and oxygen cylinders were being stored on the building’s terrace and that piping had been laid from the terrace down to the hospital operating within the flat. From a medical governance perspective, the storage and handling of oxygen cylinders in non-designated spaces raises serious safety and fire compliance concerns.
The High Court noted that it had earlier disposed of the plea on November 14, 2025, after Maheshkumar Jamnor, Assistant Municipal Commissioner of the Naupada-Kopri ward committee, assured the court that the premises would be inspected and remedial measures initiated and completed by February 15. However, the court observed that its order had been disobeyed. During the latest hearing, counsel for the civic body, on instructions from Jamnor, who was present in court, submitted that the site had been inspected and that empty oxygen cylinders were found stacked on the terrace.
It was also acknowledged that no civic permission had been obtained to operate the hospital and that regularisation of a hospital inside a residential flat owners’ tower building could not be granted.
Despite this, a request was made to adjourn the matter for 15 days so that the regularisation application could be entertained. Taking strong exception, the bench recorded, “Yet a request is made that the matter be adjourned for 15 days so that the regularisation application of the concerned hospital may be entertained. We are shocked by the conduct of the Corporation, and we are amazed by the courage of the officer who is before the court seeking extension of time for disobeying our order on the ‘spacious’ plea that regularisation can be granted. We are therefore constrained to issue suo motu contempt notice under the Contempt of Courts Act to Jamnor.”
The court granted the officer seven days to file his affidavit in reply and “test the notice if he so desires”. It also expressed concern over the officer’s conduct in court, observing, “Though the officer was standing in front of the court, he had the audacity of not even whispering an apology note. This is the level of arrogance of these officers. Somewhere the High Court’s discipline must go down deep into the roots of such instrumentalities and institutions.” When the officer attempted to apologise, Justice Ghuge orally remarked, “You are losing respect for the High Court. As long as I am here, I will take it upon myself that these institutions will start respecting the High Court. Keep that in mind.”
