Bombay High Court has issued a judgment stating that a circular issued by the Union defence ministry following the Adarsh housing scandal regarding the issuance of No Objection Certificates (NOC) for construction near Army establishments serves as guidelines and does not grant the right to prohibit construction or request demolitions.
Representative Image
The Bombay High Court has issued a judgment stating that a circular issued by the Union defence ministry following the Adarsh housing scandal regarding the issuance of No Objection Certificates (NOC) for construction near Army establishments serves as guidelines and does not grant the right to prohibit construction or request demolitions.
ADVERTISEMENT
In the case at hand, the ministry had filed a petition seeking the demolition of a commercial high-rise named 'Ganga Trueno,' which it alleged was located near the Unit of Southern Command Composite Signal Regiment at Lohegaon in Pune. This order was made available on Thursday.
The ministry referred to a circular it issued in May 2011, which contained guidelines for obtaining NOCs for building construction in proximity to Army establishments. The circular addressed concerns related to NOCs for construction on land adjacent to defence establishments, which arose after the controversies following the Adarsh Housing Society scandal.
The Adarsh Housing Society, a 31-story structure constructed in the vicinity of the military station at Colaba in south Mumbai, faced scrutiny for lacking the necessary permissions for construction. The Defence Ministry had expressed concerns about the plush society's proximity to vital Army installations, deeming it a security threat.
The High Court, in its order, noted that in the present case, the permission for constructing the building in Pune was granted in 2008, well before the defence ministry issued the circular.
The bench emphasized that the circular issued by the Ministry of Defence serves as guidelines only and does not grant it the right to seek a prohibition on ongoing construction or demolition of any building. The court highlighted that these circulars fall under a category of departmental circulars binding only upon the department's officers, not outsiders or third parties.
The circular stipulates that the Army station commander should convey objections or views about any construction to state government agencies or municipal authorities, not builders or private parties. Additionally, it does not mandate that an NOC must be obtained by the landowner undertaking the construction.
The circular, on its own, does not impose direct restrictions on building construction within a specific distance from the defence boundary. Instead, it provides authority to Commanding Officers to raise objections or make appropriate decisions. However, the circular lacks clarity regarding the course of action defence authorities may take if objections are raised but not accepted by the state government or local municipal authorities.
Consequently, the bench dismissed the petition and instructed the relevant local authority to issue an occupancy certificate to the building within eight weeks.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
