MUMBAI: Taking a tough stand against illegal constructions, a small causes court recently disqualified former Congress corporator Binita Vora in the 2012 BMC elections for unauthorized construction work carried out by her husband in his Vile Parle property. Vora had won the 2012 BMC elections by trouncing her Shiv Sena opponent but lost in 2017.BMC sources said as a result of her disqualification, Vora will be required to return all the emoluments and perks she might have enjoyed as a corporator.“Vora was disqualified to be a councillor as (her) husband had carried out unauthorized construction in his property in contravention of provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act at the time of contesting the elections in February 2012 from Ward 65,” said Judge V M Vaidya. The petition before the small causes court, filed in 2016 by the municipal commissioner, had sought an inquiry into whether Vora could be disqualified on account of the unauthorized construction.Under Section 16 (1D) of the Act, a councillor can be disqualified if he himself or his spouse or a dependent has constructed an unauthorized structure in violation of provisions of the MMC Act or the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act. The disqualification is also attracted if the councillor has helped the illegal construction or obstructed demolition of such structures.After Vora’s 2012 win, Shiv Sainik Jitendra Janavale, whose wife lost to her, had lodged a petition in the Bombay high court against the illegal construction.Vora lived with her husband Mehul Vora at Kunj Vihar bungalow he owned at Vile Parle (West). The allegation was that Mehul had constructed an unauthorized mezzanine floor and illegally lowered the plinth on the ground floor.In 2010, on receiving a notice, Mehul applied for regularization of the illegalities but the BMC rejected it. After the 2012 polls, Mehul informed the BMC that the construction had been razed. In his petition, though, Janavale claimed that it continued to exist. In 2016, the high court said an application had been submitted to regularize the structure and agreed the disqualification clause would apply in Vora’s case as work was done without the planning authority’s permission.