Maharashtra govt flags ‘security risk’, Bombay HC denies relief to autorickshaw, taxi drivers seeking space near Mumbai international airport to offer namaz during Ramazan
The Bombay High Court said petitioners were free to make a representation to the Airports Authority of India (AAI) or Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) for allotment of suitable space in the proposed redeveloped Terminal 1 premises.
The Maharashtra government Thursday informed the Bombay High Court that a survey – conducted by the police and the airport authorities – found all seven sites near Mumbai international airport considered for temporary use by autorickshaw and taxi drivers for offering prayers during Ramazan unsuitable owing to security risks.
Thereafter, the Court said it was unable to order space even for a temporary period and dismissed the plea by Taxi-Rickshaw Ola-Uber Men’s Union, argued through advocate Shehzad Naqvi. The plea was against the 2025 demolition of the temporary prayer shed of nearly 1500 square feet situated near the Domestic Terminal of the airport, where drivers, airport workers, and hotel staff used to offer Namaz during Ramazan month.
A bench of Justice Burgess P Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla had last month asked the state government and the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) to identify an alternative site in the vicinity of the airport where drivers could offer namaz during Ramzan.
On Thursday, the bench noted that even though demolition was carried out in April 2025 and the petition was filed in February 2026, “it on humanitarian grounds” requested the authorities “to consider whether some space could be allotted so that the members of petitioner Union were not inconvenienced only for Ramazan.”
“After inspecting these seven sites, the report says that all survey locations were found unsuitable due to congestion, security, and airport development plan constraints. Allowing drivers and other people to offer namaz within the Terminal 1 airport poses a potential security risk,” the bench noted.
The judges further stated in the order, “(W)e are unable to direct the respondents to allot any space to the petitioner association even for a temporary period to undertake namaz during the month of Ramazan.”
The Court observed that there was a mosque within a kilometre of the parking area where the drivers park their cars. However, the petitioner claimed the said structure was not a mosque and instead was a madrasa, where prayers are not offered.
Story continues below this ad
“When it comes to security, we will not compromise one bit. We were exploring from a humanitarian point of view. They (authorities) have examined seven different sites… We have to look at the larger picture… We have to look at the security for every passenger, irrespective of their religion. The threat doesn’t necessarily come from you (petitioners). The area has to be secured…” Justice Colabawalla orally remarked.
“Looking at the totality, we find that we are unable to give any relief to the petition. It is accordingly dismissed,” the HC held in the order.
The high court said petitioners were free to make a representation to the Airports Authority of India (AAI) or Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) for allotment of suitable space in the proposed redeveloped Terminal 1 premises.
“It is left to the discretion of the MIAL and AAI, taking into consideration all factors, but not limited to safety, security and convenience of passengers who will be utilising the airport,” the HC noted.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
