|
| SC notice to Centre, Maha on security threat to BARC |
| Press Trust of India / New Delhi Jul 22, 2009, 19:08 IST |
|
The Supreme Court today sought a response from the Centre, Maharashtra government and four real estate developers on Bharat Petroleum Corporation's (BPCL) plea alleging a security threat to its refinery, Tata Electricity Company's plant and the Bhaba Atomic Research Centre (BARC).
BPCL is objecting to construction of high-rise residential buildings overlooking Hindustan Petroleum Corporation's and its refineries, Tata plant and the BARC located in Mahul, Chembur and Mumbai, respectively.
A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan sought the response from the Ministries of Environment and Forest, and Home Affairs, Maharashtra government, four real estate developers and others.
It also restrained the private developers and authorities from creating any third party rights or giving possession even after occupation certificates are allotted to the residents till August 10, the next date of hearing.
Earlier in March, the apex court had referred the matter back to the Bombay High Court to decide the issue within three months and refused to stay construction of high-rise residential buildings.
BPCL, in its present appeal, has challenged the High Court's final judgment that dismissed its petition seeking to restrain the state government from going ahead with the construction work.
Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium and Parijat Sinha said Maharashtra government should not be permitted to go ahead with any construction activity within the area as there was high security risk involved.
According to the petition, the high court had ignored the fact that its refinery was a national asset while authorising constrution of buildings for slum dwellers.
Assessing that its refinery was worth Rs 3,000 crore, BPCL said even the Home Ministry had stated that the refinery was a vitally sensitive installation and required protection in public interest.
Sinha submitted that the Centre in its affidavit in the High Court had pointed out that the Intelligence Bureau under the Home Ministry had also accepted that such constructions could be a security threat to the installations and the BPCL refinery was a sensitive installation.
The PSU said its refinery had been categorised as "A" category for the purpose of adopting security measures.
"It is prudent that no new residential accommodation is allowed to be constructed and/or occupied near the refinery and the land be reserved and designated as a 'No Development Zone' by modifying the Development Control Plan of the state government," the petition stated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Read Business news in |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Content Guide
