Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a petition filed by the Maharashtra Housing Development Authority (MHADA) seeking approval to construct a 40-storey residential building within 3 kilometres of the Mumbai International Airport.

The division bench of the high court, consisting of Justice GS Patel and Justice Kamal Khata, stated that civil aviation norms cannot be relaxed for a public authority.

“No relaxation of civil aviation safety norms can be granted only because the project proponent is a public authority. Aviation safety has nothing at all to do with the identity of the development,” the order reads.

MHADA had filed a petition against the Ministry of Defence's decision to deny permission for the construction of a high-rise building near Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport.

MHADA had proposed a 115.54-meter-tall building, exceeding the maximum permissible height of 58.48 meters for low-income housing, accommodating 560 tenants.

MHADA had initially appealed the Ministry's decision, and the appellate authority subsequently granted permission for a reduced height of 96.68 meters.

The division bench said that “one that paints quite a startling picture, of aircraft at the CSMIA weaving and swooping around an oversized MHADA tower as they take off or land,” the bench said.

The high court further said that it would have insisted on the Airport Authority of India prescribing a much lower height

“Left to ourselves, we would have insisted on the Airport Authority of India prescribing a much lower height. MHADA is not being selectively targeted for the height restriction. If anything, it is the other way around. We trust the Appellate Authority is aware that if it permits a relaxation to MHADA, it will be required to permit that very relaxation to every other applicant or developer, including a private developer,” the order reads.

The division bench also observed that there are no exemptions merely because these are middle-income group housing schemes or because the applicant is MHADA.

Case title: Maharashtra Housing And Area Development Authority vs AAI & Anr