MUMBAI, Dec. 9 -- A comprehensive internal review by the BMC on the bottleneck-removal policy for road-widening in the island city revealed multiple irregularities and alleged collusion between ward officials and builders, which led to civic chief Bhushan Gagrani suspending the scheme altogether on October 5. HT is in possession of the review findings prepared by additional municipal commissioner (city) Ashwini Joshi, which state that the policy was undermined by "misapplication, procedural lapses, and systemic gaps in oversight". Under Regulation 33(12)(B) of the DCPR-2034, the BMC is authorised to demolish structures obstructing existing roads in exchange for compensatory Built-Up Area (BUA) for eligible occupants. Joshi's findings identified five major lapses in this. The first red flag surfaced when the priority list of roads chosen for widening was re-examined. Each ward's assistant commissioner was meant to shortlist three priority roads, obtain approval, and publish lists of eligible and ineligible PAPs before clearing obstructions. However, these criteria were routinely ignored, with several wards listing multiple roads simultaneously and demolishing structures on them selectively. Furthermore, it was found that even when most encroachments were removed, road widening did not begin, defeating the purpose of the scheme. The second lapse was that the priority list of roads was altered repeatedly. "This indicated an absence of systematic planning, arbitrary road selection, and issuance of partial NOCs, leaving works half-complete," stated Bhide's note. The third lapse concerned the irregular transfer of NOCs meant for protected occupants, who are entitled to rehabilitation tenements of a certain area. After an NOC is issued, an agreement is executed-crucially, both the provisional and final NOC must be issued in the original occupant's name. The BMC review, however, found multiple cases where eligibility had been transferred to subsequent buyers or unrelated third parties, who then received the NOCs. Such transfers deprived original residents of rehabilitation. The fourth lapse involved the unregulated gap between issuing primary and final NOCs. It was observed that final NOCs were being issued without confirming demolition or verifying mandatory documentation, leading to prolonged delays and continued road obstructions. After the suspension of the policy, the BMC is now amending DCR 33(12)(B) to introduce system-generated NOCs, GIS-based tracking of every demolition, and a clearer accountability chain, said sources. However, activist Santosh Daundkar, the first whistleblower in the matter, said this would not achieve anything and a thorough, independent probe was essential. "An FIR must be registered against the officials involved," he said. Daundkar pointed out that under the DCR 33(7) scheme, the permissible FSI was 1.33 to 2.5, while DCR 33(12)(B) granted an FSI of 4.0. "The higher incentive has pushed builder lobbies to convert projects to DCR 33(12)(B), with ward officers reportedly facilitating the racket," he said. "In the already congested island city, sanctioning such high FSI carries serious long-term risks."...