Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday sought an independent comprehensive report from the Sangh. civil Aviation Secretary Rajiv Bansal On the issue of height clearance granted for an over-ground metro rail project in Mumbai.
The HC bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and MS Karnik said, “Bansal will also consider the aspect of safety and security of the public, who live in the vicinity of Juhu airport, and throw light on whether the Metro Rail The commissioning of the line will affect the MMRDA (Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority) aircraft operations at Juhu airport in any way.
Adjournment to challenge a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) night For Metro 2B line till February 28, HC allows MMRDA to continue “preparatory work, such as geotechnical investigation and utility identification for metro rail line” till further orders and clarified “besides such preparatory work” No other work may be done on the site without the prior permission of this Court.
The HC was a PIL filed by Harit Desai challenging the No Objection Certificate (NOC) granted by the Airport Authority of India (AAI) to MMRDA earlier for the construction of an over-ground metro rail line within the funnel zone. Approach and take off climb surface of runways 26 and 08 of Juhu airport. The NOC was contrary to the Ministry’s (Altitude Restriction for the Safety of Aircraft Operations) Rules, 2015, submitted Desai’s counsel Nishant. thakri, The public interest litigation has expressed the possibility of loss of life and property in accidents when the MMRDA metro line is operational.
The rail corridor is from DN Nagar, Andheri (West) to Mankhurd.
The court, after hearing AAI’s counsel, Sandeep Marne, and State Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni wanted to know whether the NOC was in compliance with the rules.
Noting that since there is no expertise to examine the technicalities involved, but at the same time the concern raised in this PIL appears to be serious, the HC sought the assistance of an expert in civil aviation.
“Accordingly, we proposed that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)… be requested to inquire into the concerns raised by the petitioner as well as their apprehensions in the light of their complaint of violation of the provisions of the 2015 Rules by AAI. If MMRDA metro rail line is started then there will be loss of life and property due to accidents.
However, advocate Thakkar brought it to the notice of the court that Arun Kumar, who is the current DGCA, was the Joint Secretary (Airports) of the Ministry of Civil Aviation at the relevant time, and was involved in taking the decision. Procedure for issue of impugned NOC. Thus he requested for replacement of DGCA by Secretary, Civil Aviation, which was accepted by the HC after Kumbhakoni and Marne did not object.
The HC directed that Thakkar and DP Singh, counsel for the central government, would bring their order to the notice of the secretary, ministry of civil aviation.
The HC bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Dutta and MS Karnik said, “Bansal will also consider the aspect of safety and security of the public, who live in the vicinity of Juhu airport, and throw light on whether the Metro Rail The commissioning of the line will affect the MMRDA (Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority) aircraft operations at Juhu airport in any way.
Adjournment to challenge a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) night For Metro 2B line till February 28, HC allows MMRDA to continue “preparatory work, such as geotechnical investigation and utility identification for metro rail line” till further orders and clarified “besides such preparatory work” No other work may be done on the site without the prior permission of this Court.
The HC was a PIL filed by Harit Desai challenging the No Objection Certificate (NOC) granted by the Airport Authority of India (AAI) to MMRDA earlier for the construction of an over-ground metro rail line within the funnel zone. Approach and take off climb surface of runways 26 and 08 of Juhu airport. The NOC was contrary to the Ministry’s (Altitude Restriction for the Safety of Aircraft Operations) Rules, 2015, submitted Desai’s counsel Nishant. thakri, The public interest litigation has expressed the possibility of loss of life and property in accidents when the MMRDA metro line is operational.
The rail corridor is from DN Nagar, Andheri (West) to Mankhurd.
The court, after hearing AAI’s counsel, Sandeep Marne, and State Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni wanted to know whether the NOC was in compliance with the rules.
Noting that since there is no expertise to examine the technicalities involved, but at the same time the concern raised in this PIL appears to be serious, the HC sought the assistance of an expert in civil aviation.
“Accordingly, we proposed that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)… be requested to inquire into the concerns raised by the petitioner as well as their apprehensions in the light of their complaint of violation of the provisions of the 2015 Rules by AAI. If MMRDA metro rail line is started then there will be loss of life and property due to accidents.
However, advocate Thakkar brought it to the notice of the court that Arun Kumar, who is the current DGCA, was the Joint Secretary (Airports) of the Ministry of Civil Aviation at the relevant time, and was involved in taking the decision. Procedure for issue of impugned NOC. Thus he requested for replacement of DGCA by Secretary, Civil Aviation, which was accepted by the HC after Kumbhakoni and Marne did not object.
The HC directed that Thakkar and DP Singh, counsel for the central government, would bring their order to the notice of the secretary, ministry of civil aviation.
,