MUMBAI, Sept. 2 -- The Bombay High Court has directed the demolition of dangerously dilapidated buildings in two housing societies in Vasai (West), observing that public safety must prevail over disputes raised by a handful of dissenting members. A division bench of justices GS Kulkarni and Manjusha Deshpande made it clear that once a building is declared unsafe, residents cannot obstruct the municipal corporation from demolishing it, nor can minority members delay redevelopment decisions taken by an overwhelming majority. The court's decision assumes significance as it comes days after 17 people died when an illegal residential building collapsed in Virar on August 27. The case in the high court concerned building numbers H-1 and H-2 of the Deepanjali Cooperative Housing Society (CHS), and building numbers H-3 and H-4 of the Pushpanjali CHS, located on Ambadi Road in Vasai (West). On February 28, 2025, the Vasai-Virar City Municipal Corporation (VVCMC) had categorised these buildings as C-1 structures, meaning they were too dangerous for habitation and required immediate demolition. Although conflicting structural audit reports initially created confusion, the matter was referred to the VVCMC's Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which, after due consideration, confirmed on June 27, 2025, that the buildings were unsafe. Acting on this report, the VVCMC issued notices on July 1, calling upon the residents to vacate their homes so that demolition could proceed. The high court noted that, in line with its earlier judgments in other matters, civic bodies are under a legal obligation to take swift action once structures are found to pose risks to human life, and that officials who fail to act may themselves be held accountable. It was further observed that in the present case, the housing society members had already resolved to redevelop the properties, with 87% of Pushpanjali CHS members and 92% of Deepanjali CHS members voting in favour of redevelopment and appointing a developer for the project. The petitioners argued that the obstruction was being caused only by a few members who opposed certain aspects of the redevelopment plan. The court agreed with the petitioners' contention that a minority of members could not be permitted to hold up redevelopment when the buildings had been officially declared unsafe and the majority had decided to proceed. Citing earlier precedents, the court reiterated that redevelopment cannot be stalled by a small group of residents adopting an obstructive approach. It held that while the minority members are entitled to pursue their objections through appropriate legal proceedings, such objections cannot endanger lives or delay the demolition of hazardous buildings. During the hearing, the counsel for the VVCMC confirmed that the authority was ready to proceed with demolition but sought police protection to deal with any resistance. On their part, the dissenting members did not dispute the dangerous condition of the buildings, but requested additional time to vacate due to the Ganesh festival. The court found this request reasonable but granted them additional time only on the condition that the residents filed undertakings to vacate their flats unconditionally and refrained from obstructing the demolition. Disposing of the petitions, the high court ordered that residents opposing demolition must file undertakings by August 26, 2025, committing to vacate within two weeks. If they fail to do so, the VVCMC was empowered to evict them with police assistance and carry out the demolition. The judges further directed that the cost of demolition would be borne by the housing societies themselves and recoverable by the civic body. While permitting the appointed developer to undertake demolition if authorised by the societies within 10 days, the court clarified that if the VVCMC was to carry out the work, police protection must be made available to ensure there is no obstruction....