Bombay High Court Raises Concerns Over Navy's Intelligence Failure in High-Rise Case
The Bombay High Court, in an interim order issued on Friday, has expressed significant surprise at what it termed a "failure of intelligence" by the Indian Navy. The court noted that the Navy failed to notice the gradual construction of a high-rise building in close proximity to INS Shikra, the premier naval air station located in south Mumbai.
Court's Interim Order and Developer's Risk
While the High Court did not immediately halt construction work on the building, known as Jadhavji Mansion, it issued a crucial directive. The court stated that any construction work beyond the 15th floor would proceed at the developer's own risk and potential consequences. This decision comes as the court hears a petition filed by the Navy's Local Military Authority in Mumbai, which seeks to stop work on the 20-storey high-rise for lacking the Navy's No Objection Certificate (NOC).
The bench, comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Abhay Mantri, remarked, "We are surprised how the petitioner failed to notice a building gradually reaching ground plus 19 floors." The court clarified that its earlier order on February 16, which temporarily suspended workers' entry until February 18, was solely due to an impending VVIP movement involving Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Mumbai.
Potential Demolition and Legal Consequences
In a stern warning, the High Court indicated that if it eventually concludes the NOC was mandatory, it would order the demolition of all floors above the 15th. The court dictated in open court, "If we conclude the BMC was lax or complicit, or if circumstances indicate they conducted a blunder by granting CC without Naval NOC, we would not hesitate to direct prosecution of such concerned BMC officials."
The court further mandated that for any third-party rights to be created above the 15th floor, the builder must disclose the pending nature of the Navy's petition. The final hearing of the case is scheduled to begin at the admission stage on March 30.
Arguments from Both Sides
The builder, represented by senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas and Argud Partners, argued that the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) granted permission for ground plus 15 floors in October 2010, when no NOC requirement existed. Dwarkadas contended that even the Defence Ministry's May 2011 guidelines do not mandate an NOC but merely permit objections on security grounds, which were not raised by the Navy.
Dwarkadas also questioned the Navy's selective concern, pointing to slum clusters situated "cheek-by-jowl" to Navy premises and asking why these were not considered security threats. He further challenged the Navy's "line-of-sight" argument, citing other high-rises in the vicinity that have not faced objections.
The Navy, represented by senior counsel RV Govilkar, maintained that the high-rise poses a security risk due to its "line of sight" to the naval base, a concern that emerged last year during an inspection of an adjoining building. Govilkar explained that other buildings are over 15 years old, predating current guidelines, and thus "nothing can be done about them."
Court's Observations on Intelligence and Security
The High Court expressed intrigue at the Navy's stance, noting, "We are intrigued by the submission that though these buildings are very close and threat perception would first hover above them, the naval authorities feel they cannot be touched because they are more than 15 years old." The court observed that it could see "innumerable doors and windows" and some buildings clearly within a stone's throw of the naval base.
In a pointed remark, the court added, "What surprised us is the intelligence gathering network of the Navy... if a building as tall as G+19 in line... was completed in 2024, we are prima facie surprised at the lapse in intelligence of the petitioner." The court also noted that the Navy cannot deny several VVIP movements between the building's completion and now, suggesting that if the building went unnoticed, it could only be due to naval intelligence failures.
Next Steps and Legal Proceedings
The High Court has directed the builder to file a reply by March 9, with a rejoinder from the Navy, if any, due by March 23. The BMC has also been asked to respond to all allegations, including serious claims by the Navy regarding a 7-month delay in handing over documents related to building permissions sought last May and the failure to seek an NOC.
The court recorded the Navy's current anxiety, stating that the builder constructing the high-rise "is watching over their property." With the building standing at a height of 70 metres (20 floors) since 2024, the court's observations remain prima facie as the matter proceeds to final hearing and disposal.
