A Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the tragic collapse of a hoarding in Ghatkopar, which claimed 17 lives on May 13, has uncovered a significant conflict of interest involving a private legal firm and Ego Media Pvt Ltd. The legal firm, which provided an opinion favouring the Government Railway Police’s (GRP) ownership of the land in question, was found to have been paid by Ego Media, the company that owned the ill-fated hoarding.
The legal firm’s opinion asserted that the rules of the Railways, rather than those of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), applied to the plot. This interpretation exempted Ego Media’s hoarding, measuring 140×120 feet, from BMC’s regulations, which cap hoarding size at 40×40 feet, and from paying related fees. Subsequent investigations revealed that the land actually belonged to the Maharashtra government, meaning BMC rules should have been enforced.
A police officer involved in the probe explained, “When questioned, GRP officials stated that their legal stance was based on advice from their own legal officer and two external legal entities consulted in June 2021. It emerged that one of these entities, which provided a favourable opinion, was compensated by Ego Media, not by the GRP, suggesting a prima facie conflict of interest.”
The SIT discovered that Ego Media paid Rs 30,000 to the legal firm for the report submitted to the GRP on June 21, 2021, which stated that BMC regulations did not apply. “We have verified that the payment for this specific report came from Ego Media, not the GRP,” the officer noted.
Further scrutiny revealed that Ego Media had previously engaged the same legal firm for 17-18 assignments, consistently making payments. This pattern, coupled with statements corroborating the Rs 30,000 payment for the GRP report, strengthens the case for a conflict of interest.
The GRP initially sought legal opinions to decide on Ego Media’s application for erecting a fourth hoarding, following a directive from the previous commissioner mandating BMC permission for earlier hoardings. However, the legal firm’s biased opinion contributed to the tragic oversight that culminated in the collapse.
This incident underscores the critical need for transparent and unbiased legal consultations in public safety matters. The revelation of Ego Media’s financial involvement with the legal firm tasked with advising the GRP raises serious ethical concerns and highlights systemic vulnerabilities that demand immediate rectification.
The SIT’s findings call for stringent measures to prevent such conflicts of interest in future cases, ensuring that legal advice in matters of public safety remains impartial and free from external influence. This scandal serves as a stark reminder of the devastating consequences that can arise when corporate interests compromise regulatory integrity.
