Mumbai: Bombay high court on Friday, in an interim order, said prima facie there appeared to be a "failure of intelligence" by the Navy in noticing how a high rise came up in the vicinity of INS Shikra, the premier naval air station in south Mumbai. The HC did not immediately stay construction work on the high rise, Jadhavji Mansion, but said work beyond the 15th floor would be at the developer's risk.
"We are surprised how the petitioner (the Navy's Local Military Authority in Mumbai) failed to notice a building gradually reaching ground plus 19 floors," Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Abhay Mantri said. The HC was hearing a naval petition filed through a commanding officer, which sought to stop work on a 20-storey high-rise within 500 metres of the Naval Air Station for want of its no objection certificate (NOC).
The HC, however, noted that its February 16 order to suspend workers' entry until February 18 at the building site was only because it was informed of the impending VVIP movement, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi due to arrive in Mumbai on February 17. It said it did not wish to continue such an order at this juncture, but in its temporary order pending the final disposal of the petition, it directed the builder "to develop property at own risk and consequences beyond 53 m (or 15th floor, which was originally approved in 2010 before the MOD's 2011 guidelines provided for its objections over security)".
"If we eventually conclude the NOC was mandatory, we would direct demolition above 15 floors," the HC said, as Justice Ghuge dictated in open court.
The HC added, "If we conclude the BMC was lax or complicit, or if circumstances indicate they conducted a blunder by granting CC without Naval NOC, and if circumstances so indicate, we would not hesitate to direct prosecution of such concerned BMC officials." For any third-party rights to be created above the 15th floor, the builder will have to disclose the pendency of the Navy's petition, the HC added.
The final hearing of the petition is to begin at the admission stage on March 30. The builder, represented by senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas and Argud Partners, said a reply would be filed in 4 weeks. The HC sought the reply by March 9 and a rejoinder, if any, from the Navy by March 23. The HC sought BMC's reply too on all counts, including what it said were serious allegations levelled by the Navy of a 7-month delay in handing over documents regarding building permissions it sought last May, and for seeking no NOC.
Dwarkadas argued that BMC gave permission for ground plus 15 floors in October 2010, when there was no requirement of any NOC, and even the Defence Ministry's May 2011 guidelines do not mandate a NOC and permit "objections" to be raised on security grounds, which were not made. Dwarkadas again cited the slums sitting "cheek-by-jowl" to Navy premises and questioned how the slum cluster was not considered a threat, since anyone could walk in there.
The Navy, represented by senior counsel RV Govilkar, said there was a 10-ft wall; besides, the high-rise was in the "line of sight" and hence a risk, which was noticed last year when officers went to inspect an adjoining building. Dwarkadas again questioned what the Navy was doing for 15 years when the construction was coming up gradually, and he questioned the "line-of-sight" argument, also citing other high-rises in the vicinity and the lack of the Navy's objection to them.
Govilkar said the other buildings were over 15 years old, pre-dating its guidelines. The Navy said buildings in between were more than 15 years old and "nothing can be done about them". "We are intrigued by the submission that though these buildings are very close and threat perception would first hover above them, the naval authorities feel they cannot be touched because they are more than 15 years old," the HC dictated, saying it was getting no answer when it can "see innumerable doors and windows" and some buildings clearly within a stone's throw distance of the Naval base. The HC added, "What surprised us is the intelligence gathering network of the Navy... if a building as tall as G+19 in line... was completed in 2024, we are prima facie surprised at the lapse in intelligence of the petitioner."
Govilkar said when VVIP movement occurs, precautions are taken in other buildings as well. He said the towers in Badhwar are govt buildings.
The HC recorded, "Today, until pleadings are complete, the anxiety of (Navy)" is that the builder constructing the high-rise "is watching over their property." The HC said the building was at a height of 70 metres (20 floors) since 2024. "The Navy cannot deny several VVIP movements between then and now, and yet if this building went unnoticed, we find it can only be due to naval intelligence," the Judge dictated, clarifying its observations are prima facie, and posted the matter for final hearing and disposal.
Start a Conversation
Post comment