Court allows Essar to complete work on Walkeshwar structure

The directions of the Bombay High Court came in a notice of motion filed by Rupa Investment Co and Chilloda Farms, both belonging to the same group, seeking that the earlier stay on the construction be vacated.

While the long and chequered history of litigation began much prior to 1996, in the instant case, it started when the then minister of state for urban development Ravindra Mane, in his order dated September 27, 1996, granted permission to the Ruias for the reconstruction of two bungalows on plot on 4/294 at the Walkeshwar seafront. It was the contention of the group that all they were seeking was a reconstruction of the already existing authorised structures. The permission for construction by the former minister was given provided the industrial group obtained the necessary clearances from the Union Government under the CRZ (Coastal Regulatory Zone) regulations if the project was valued above Rs 5 crore and from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation if it was valued below Rs 5 crore.

Subsequently, they obtained a certificate from the BMC that the project was valued at Rs 3.9 crore. Again, since the state had the powers to authorise such construction under the CZMP rules for projects falling under the CRZ II category, they approached the minister and obtained the permission.

Meanwhile, however, BEAG filed a public interest petition arguing that while the earlier structures occupied only 3000 sq feet, the new structures were to occupy 27,000 sq feet. The NGO also argued that under the DC regulation 59, the building could come up only after leaving a 10 metre open space between the seashore and the plot, as well has have adequate margins around the structure under Regulation 29.

All these arguments were considered by the division bench of the then Chief Justice M B Shah and Justice F I Rebello where Rupa Investments argued that once the CRZ notification came into being, it overruled the DC regulations. This was opposed by the petitioners, who argued that environmental concerns demanded that the more stringent norms be complied with.

The division bench on March 27, 1997 stayed the construction of the structure, but gave the Ruias permission to apply for CRZ clearances. These clearances came by September 1998 and believing that the stay automatically was lifted, the industrial house restarted the construction. The BEAG then filed a contempt case, where the Ruias apologised to Justice A P Shah. Their apology was accepted and they were given leave to approach the courts for vacating the stay on the construction.

Following this, they moved the bench of Justice Srikrishna. At the court, senior counsel Janak Dwarkadas argued that they had all the requisite permission from the Union Ministry, as well as the State Government. They based their contention on the ground that Godrej had been allowed to construct their structure on the same shoreline subject to a clause that they would vacate if a similar petition against them succeeded.

Finding merit in this argument, the bench then passed the orders.

The Ruias will now have to set out on who will actually occupy the structure, which has two storeys — basements — below the ground and five storeys above and give the undertaking that it will be vacated in case the final orders are that it has to be pulled down.

The BEAG, meanwhile, sought leave to amend the main petition seeking to challenge the clearance granted under the CRZ notification.