Aviation Safety Norms Can't Be Relaxed For Public Authority: Bombay High Court Refuses Height Relaxation For MHADA High Rise Near Mumbai Airport

The Bombay High Court recently rejected Maharashtra Housing And Area Development Authority's (MHADA) writ petition seeking relaxation of height restrictions for a 40-floor building near the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport (CSMIA) in Mumbai.

A division bench of Justice GS Patel and Justice Kamal Khata observed that aviation safety has nothing to do with the identity of the developer, and no relaxation of civil aviation safety norms can be granted merely because the project is proposed by a public authority.

“MHADA certainly cannot claim a legal, let alone constitutional, right to a taller building. It cannot contend that civil aviation safety standards should not apply to it. It cannot contend that merely because this is a MHADA project, its exceeding a mandated heights poses no danger to civil aviation. We are even more reluctant to accept the proposition, one that paints a quite startling picture, of aircraft at CSMIA weaving and swooping around an oversized MHADA tower as they take off or land”, the court held.

MHADA proposed a construction of 560 tenements in a building with a height of 115.54 meters, or nearly 40 floors, within a four-kilometer radius of CSMIA. The Airport Authority of India (AAI) has specified height restrictions based on internationally mandated aviation safety standards and norms, with lower permissible heights closer to the airport.

AAI communicated a maximum permissible height of 58.48 meters to MHADA. However, MHADA filed an appeal, and the Appellate Authority of the Ministry of Civil Aviation permitted a height of 96.68 meters. MHADA challenged this decision in the present petition.

The court noted that MHADA is not being selectively targeted for the height restriction. Noting that the appellate authority order is in MHADA's favour, the court highlighted that if relaxation is granted to MHADA, the same relaxation must be granted to every other applicant or developer, including private developers. The court remarked that such a petition should not have been filed by a responsible public authority and rejected it.

Case no. – Writ Petition (L) No. 161 of 2023

Case Title – Maharashtra Housing And Area Development Authority v. Airport Authority of India & Anr.