Thread by @lawbarandbench

Bombay High Court is hearing PIL of party in person seeking removal of illegal structures in the way of international airport in Mumbai.

@DGCAIndia @CSMIA_Official

AAI submits affidavit: There are 123 applications received, 104 have been granted and 19 are pending.
We refer to civil aviation height restriction rules of 2015 under the aircraft act.
Under Rule 4, schedule 2, calculations are mentioned.

#BombayHighCourt

Yashwant Shenoy, petitioner in person - rules are standard, provides for when will extra height be given. Amendment made to this. You get a certificate of no objection valid for 12 years, but once an obstacle always an obstacle.

#BombayHighCourt

Shenoy: Nothing can change near the present airport. My concern is let us not spoil the new airport. I don’t want structures to be demolished, I know how important it is for the people who have invested in those structures.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: Where is the statement in your affidavit that increasing height from 55 to 116 mtrs is violation of statutes? Where have you said so?
You have to make statements to supplement the press release, to build your case.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: You have to show how DGCA, AAI and MIAL are in violation of specific statutes which may have allowed constructions.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: If we are to consider the airport at navi mumbai, then we have to consider why the new decision ought not permit height to be raised to 116 mtrs.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: If you want to challenge the decision allowing relaxing of height restrictions, then you have to show why is it bad in law.
You have annexed the press note but you have to show why it is bad. You have to show us with statements. Otherwise how are we to decide?

#BombayHC

Court: You file a better affidavit placing on record why the decision is bad.

Adv Saket Mone for proposed intervenor: My building haa received NOC from civil aviation and there was notice issued for demolition.

#BombayHighCourt

Mone: The orders passed and I have filed an appeal before the authorities, but now possibly after milords orders, they are threatening demolition even with an appeal pending.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: You file a separate writ petition file to put a stay on the demolition till appeal is heard. We have said that Clear out the objectionable structures, but those structures where there are appeals pending, you move the appropriate court for orders.

#BombayHighCourt

Court (to Shenoy): Even before Navi Mumbai airport they have displayed the thresh hold. What we like to know is how have they displayed the threshhold and granted NOCs even before airport has come up. Support your contentions with relevant statutes.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: We have to give the respondents an opportunity to respond.

#BombayHighCourt

Order: After Aug 25 order, two affidavits are filed. First affidavit of the petitioner where he has sought to challebge the press note of CIDCO. The petitioner, we may note, has failed to file any pleading that any lifting of height restrictions from 55 to 116.10 m..#BombayHC

Order: is in violation of any statutory provisions. We grant one further opportunity to place on record the affidavit what is the violation of statutory provisions and what is that the court is supposed to look into. #BombayHighCourt

Order: Petitioner may file affidavit by September 12 and give copies to all respondents. They are at liberty to file reply affidavits by sept 19. Rejoinder by 26 sept.

#BombayHighCourt

Order: By said order we have called upon the collector, to file affidavit by sept 22 indicating steps to remove obstacles and to illustrate how. We propose to list this matter on sept 29.

#BombayHighCourt

Order: In so far as second affidavit is filed, we have noted that on receipt of 123 applications for the area within 20 kms of the airport, 104 applications are granted and 19 are pending.
Further orders will be passed after considering matter in depth.

#BombayHighCourt

Shneoy: Replies are expected on the PIL filed.

Court: There are two aspects, one we are now dealing with objection free obstacles where no body is required to reply now.
Second part is proposed constructions, so before construction starts we want to know.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: We are concerned with statutory violation. If there is breach, then we will remedy breach, if there is no statutory violation then how are we to act. We also feel an expert in the field is required to appear before us to explain. #BombayHighCourt

Sr Adv Vikram Nankani: An amicus who knows and can give tehcnical explanations.

Court: Mr. (Sr Adv) Nishant Thakker is appearing before us for a Juhu airport matter. We can appoint him as amicus.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: What is amusing to us is that airport comes up first and then buildings.
Then you have to find out how airport can be accomodated… That is amusing to us.

#BombayHighCourt

Court: Even before airport has come up there is construction, and that will lead to a tight airport, that is our concern.

Nankani: On the structures to be demolished, we will sit with the collector and sort out. There are some hutments..

#BombayHighCourt

Court: Between the high rise buildings and hutments who should be your target? who is a potential risk?

#BombayHighCourt

Hearing ends.