Air India colony case: Bombay HC rejects plea by staff against demolition of vacant buildings

The court further rejected a request by the association to continue status quo in the matter for two weeks until the Supreme Court heard the related matter on February 13.

The court noted that employees are merely licensees of the apartments and their right is limited to their service contracts.

The MIAL also stated that it will follow due process of law and necessary permissions will be obtained before demolishing the unoccupied buildings, ensuring minimal impact on occupants. It said priority will be given to human safety and no occupied buildings will be demolished without following due process of law and essential services including water and electricity will continue to function. “There will be no hindrance in the operation of the schools until lawful accommodation vacation occurs,” the MIAL stated.

The MIAL, on January 26, made a statement that it would not take any coercive steps against the 19 suit structures till January 29 and the same was later continued till February 2. The court had continued the status quo in the matter till February 5.

A single-judge bench of Justice Rajesh N Laddha passed an order in the association’s appeal and rejected the same.
The Air India colony is spread over an 184-acre land parcel and houses 350 families employed with the airline who are against the handover. As part of its expansion plan, the MIAL had initiated the demolition of 19 vacant buildings at the Air India Colony amid protests by Air India employees. The land on which the colony was built was owned by the state government and was leased to the Airports Authority of India (AAI), which had given the land to Air India.

The MIAL, through senior advocate Vikram Nankani, had argued that the land on which the colony was situated was leased to it and was required for airport expansion.

The MIAL said no loss or damage would be caused to the structures of 310 families occupying other buildings and expansion of the airport, which is already congested, is required in ‘public interest’.

The association, through advocate Ashok Shetty, claimed the MIAL had violated the Supreme Court’s order of last year that had stayed the demolition of the colony in Kalina and had illegally deployed bouncers to threaten people. The employees had claimed that while they did not oppose redevelopment projects, they should not lose company benefits, including colony accommodation facilities.

Advocate Aditya Mehta for Tata Sons-owned Air India endorsed MIAL’s arguments by denying allegations by the Association, and stated that the employees who had vacated their flats were provided all benefits along with assistance for securing new rental accommodations and expenses for school admissions for their children as well.fits, including colony accommodation facilities.