High-rise near INS Shikra: HC raps Navy over ‘lapse’, 'intelligence failure'
Mumbai (PTI): The Bombay High Court on Friday pulled up the Navy for its “failure in intelligence” while questioning how a high-rise came up unnoticed in the vicinity of INS Shikra, the maritime force’s premier air station in south Mumbai.
A bench of Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Abhay Mantri said it was of the prima facie opinion that there has been an intelligence lapse on the part of the Navy as it failed to notice a skyscraper being constructed in the vicinity of its establishment.
The court was hearing a petition filed by the Commanding Officer of INS Shikra seeking to halt the project, citing significant security risks to the sensitive military installation.
The bench also questioned the Navy’s selective opposition to only this particular building when there are several other residential high-rises in the vicinity, with some at a “stone throw distance” from INS Shikra.
The petitioner’s advocate R V Govilkar said the other buildings were constructed before 2011, when the Ministry of Defence issued a notification, making a No Objection Certificate mandatory for the construction of tall structures near defence establishments.
The court, however, noted that the present high-rise received its commencement certificate in March 2011, and construction began since then.
“You (Navy) are trying to hide grave lapse on your part… lapse in intelligence and security… there has been a failure of intelligence. The Navy has been sitting in its office and noticed this building only after almost 70 metres (19 storeys) had already been constructed till the year 2024,” HC said.
There has been a prima facie lapse of intelligence, the court said, adding, “We are surprised as to how the Navy has failed to see such a high-rise building being constructed all these years? How has the building gone unnoticed? This can only be attributed to the failure of intelligence on the part of the naval officials.”
The bench said it cannot permit its earlier order, temporarily halting construction activity at the building site, to continue as it was passed due to security concerns ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to the city.
The court said since construction up to 53.07 metres (15 storeys) was permitted in the area, the developer of the building shall develop above the permissible height at their own risk.
It added that if the court finally concludes that an NOC (no objection certificate) was mandatory, then it would direct the demolition of the building above the permissible 53 metres.
The court also warned action against Mumbai civic body officials if it is found that the corporation has been complacent or has committed a blunder by granting the commencement certificate without an NOC from the Navy.
It posted the matter for final hearing on March 30.
After perusing photographs of the area near INS Shikra submitted by the developer, the HC noted that there are several other high-rises between the structure under construction and the establishment.
“In fact, from the under-construction building, the naval base is out of sight. This is our prima facie view. We are intrigued that there are other buildings very close to the establishment and a threat perception hovers around them too, but the Navy has not done anything about them,” the court said.
Those buildings are literally a stone’s throw from INS Shikra, Justice Ghuge said.
Senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas, who represented the developer, argued that since the building received its commencement certificate in March 2011, months before the notification issued by the Ministry of Defence, it did not require the mandatory NOC from the defence.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC flags 'trust deficit', orders deployment of judicial officers in Bengal's SIR exercise
New Delhi (PTI): Dismayed over ongoing tussle between the West Bengal government and the Election Commission, the Supreme Court on Friday issued an "extraordinary" direction to deploy serving and former district judges to assist the poll panel in the controversy-ridden special intensive revision of electoral rolls in the state.
Ruing the "unfortunate blame game" and the "trust deficit" between the EC and the "democratically elected" TMC government, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi passed a slew of fresh directions to ensure completion of the special intensive revision (SIR) process.
The bench ordered deputation of judicial officers for adjudication of claims and objections of the persons, who are put under the logical discrepancy lists and facing removal of their names from the electoral rolls.
Logical discrepancies in progeny linking with the 2002 voter list include instances of a mismatch in the parent's name and the age difference between a voter and their parent being less than 15 years or more than 50 years.
The top court asked Calcutta High Court Chief Justice Sujoy Paul to spare some judicial officers and find former judges to assist in the SIR work as it took serious note of the state government not sparing enough grade 'A'0 officers for the revision exercise.
Chief Justice Paul has been asked to convene a meeting on Saturday and the same will be attended by Chief Secretary, DGP, official from the EC, Advocate General of the state. Additional Solicitor General of the Union and the Registrar General of the high court on the issue of finalising modalities of deputing judicial officers in SIR process.
"In order to ensure fairness in the adjudication of the genuineness of the documents and consequential inclusion/exclusion in voters list, and as agreed to by both sides, we are left with hardly any other option but to request the Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court to spare serving judicial officers along with some former judicial officers in the rank of Additional District Judge and District Judges who can then be requested to revisit/dispose of the pending claims under the category of 'logical discrepancy'," the bench ordered.
Disregarding the vehement objections of the state government, the top court permitted the EC to publish a final list of voters in the state by February 28, the deadline fixed earlier. However, it also permitted the election commission to come out with supplementary lists later.
It noted that no prejudice will be caused to anyone if supplementary voter lists are issued after February 28 as names of electors can be included till the last date of filing of nomination papers for the elections.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, alleged that the orders passed by the electoral roll officers are now being scrutinised by a "new species of officers" called the 'special roll officers'.
"The 'special roll officers' cannot trump EROs. How can they on a wholesale basis reject what ERO has done?" Divan asked.
The election commission refuted that claim and said that the SROs are there since inception. The bench agreed with the submissions of the poll panel.
The bench further said that if there is non-cooperation then the court will deploy judicial officers or ask the EC to deploy the officials from other states.
During the hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the state government, said that there might be a law and order problem, if the poll panel is permitted to publish the final voter list by February 28.
In a bid to balance equity, the top court said such judicial officers/former judicial officers, while adjudicating the claims and objections, shall be assisted by poll panel's micro-observers and also by the officers of the state government.
"The circumstances being extraordinary, the entrustment of work to judicial officers and former judicial officers is also extraordinary," the bench said.
Senior advocate DS Naidu, appearing for the EC raised the issue of non-cooperation and the law and order enforcement alleging that the documents have been torn apart from miscreants and yet hardly any action has been taken.
He produced the statements made by different political functionaries against the poll officials and said no FIRs were registered against anyone.
CJI Kant, who perused the statements said, "Unfortunately, during the election such irresponsible statements are being made. If no action is taken, the DGP will face the consequences."
The bench then directed district collectors and SPs of the state to provide logistical support and security to the judicial officers deputed for the ongoing SIR work while making it clear that orders passed by judicial officers will be deemed as orders of court.
It said the collector and SPs will be considered under deemed deputation for the purpose of ensuring compliance of directions that may be issued from time to time by the court.
It directed the DGP to file an affidavit on the steps taken on complaints regarding threats to officers involved in the SIR process.
The bench directed the Calcutta High Court chief justice to evolve some alternate interim arrangement for shifting of matters requiring urgent relief to other courts for ten days.
On February 9, the top court made it clear to the states that it will not allow anyone to create any impediment in completion of the SIR and directed the WB DGP to file an affidavit on the EC allegation of burning of its notices by miscreants.
