Mumbai: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by the Airports Authority of India (AAI) against a Feb Bombay High Court judgment that permitted a high rise in a slum rehabilitation project in Laldonger, Chembur.
HC directed AAI to issue a no objection certificate (NOC) for height clearance to builders, noting an appellate committee had already approved the height, and it could not be reversed over minor discrepancies in undertakings and certificates.
Aggrieved by the HC order, AAI went to Supreme Court to appeal. Supreme Court on April 7 dismissed AAI’s special leave petition. The SC bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi said. “We are not inclined to interfere” with the high court judgment.
The project has 10 proposed towers, four rehabilitation buildings to accommodate 700 slum dwellers, and three free sale towers. Two rehab buildings were constructed up to 15 floors and two free sale buildings up to 14 floors, HC was told.
Three builders—Paradigm Dotom Buildheights LLP, Jai Bhagwati Developers & Builders, and R K Madhani & Co—executed a joint venture in 2010 to carry out the slum rehabilitation project on a 3.3-acre Chembur plot. Last year, the builders petitioned HC against AAI’s order asking for a fresh application based on rules that came into existence in 2020. The developers said they sought a height nod from AAI and the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) for construction up to 84.92 metres above the mean sea level (AMSL), which was approved in 2016 by an appellate panel of the civil aviation ministry subject to an undertaking. They undertook to abide by “risk mitigation measures”, including notifying the airport operator before construction penetrates the “obstacle limitation surface”.
AAI in its special leave petition said if the HC judgment is not set aside, it would face great hardship. It stated a revised NOC for height clearance could not be issued given that “considerable time had lapsed” and the height clearance request needs to be “reassessed” under present rules.
The HC division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna in its Feb 17 judgment said the AAI decision was “too pedantic”, given that the height was approved by the appellate committee on July 11, 2016. “Merely because the petitioners (builders) failed to provide the name of the signatory on the undertaking and the addresses of the witnesses who only signed the undertaking furnished by the petitioners to the AAI, such ministerial lapse cannot be held to dis-entitle them from the benefits of the revised NOC,” HC held.