Read Time: 06 minutes
Court noted that given the current state of civilian occupation, the Army’s ability to carry out exercises in the area is severely compromised and now the area is of no use to the army
In a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) regarding the protection of defense land in Ayodhya, the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow Bench on Monday addressed concerns over unauthorized constructions in areas notified for military use. Court directed the Ayodhya Development Authority (ADA) to consider new applications for construction map approvals in the notified area, subject to state government's decision on demolition of existing constructions.
Court observed that despite the government declaring the villages for Army maneuvers, several civilian structures, including hotels and highways, have been built, hampering military activities.
The bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Om Prakash Shukla criticized the state government for failing to clarify that construction in the notified area required prior approval and stated that complaints from the Army about these developments were ignored.
The Army suggested dismantling the illegal structures, but the court deferred the matter to the state government, leaving the decision in their hands.
The court proposed that the best solution might be to allow new construction in the area, provided the Ayodhya Development Authority (ADA) secures a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Army. It emphasized that, given the current state of civilian occupation, the Army’s ability to carry out exercises in the area is severely compromised and it is of no use to the Army now.
Additionally, the court ordered that the ADA would consider applications for construction in the area and forward them to the Army for NOCs, which should be granted within two months.
The issue arose from a 2021 notification by the Uttar Pradesh government designating 13,391 acres across 14 villages for Army use, but civilian construction has made the land unfit for military exercises.
Today, the bench questioned the purpose of maintaining the area under notification if the Army could no longer utilize it and requested clarity from the ADA on the feasibility of removing existing structures. The ADA responded that demolition wasn't practical but indicated future construction could proceed if the Army's NOC is granted.
The present PIL was initiated after residents from the vicinity of the Manjha Field Firing Range, which spans approximately 13,391 acres and is owned by farmers from 14 villages, filed writ petitions before the high court alleging that the ADA had withheld map sanctions for proposed constructions due to the firing range's proximity. Despite verbal assurances, the petitioners were asked to obtain an NOC from the Army, complicating their efforts to proceed with development.
On September 24, the court had asked the officials from both the Indian Army and the ADA to appear before it on the next date to clarify the necessity of the NOC and its implications for future construction projects.
Case Title: Suo Moto In Re Protection Of Defence Land At Ayodhya
Please Login or Register
