Limitation For Executing Partition Decree Not Suspended Till Engrossment; Right To Seek Engrossment Subsists During 12-Year Execution Period: Allahabad HC Unilateral Revocation Of Registered Gift Deed Through Sub-Registrar Is Void, Donor Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mediation Cannot Be Forced Upon Unwilling Party In Civil Suits; Consent Of Both Sides Essential: Bombay High Court Unmarried Daughter Not Entitled To Freedom Fighter Pension If Gainfully Employed At Time Of Father's Death: Calcutta High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Denied For Lack Of Formal Divorce From First Marriage: Delhi High Court ONGC Cannot Demand Security From Award Holder After Giving ‘No Objection’ To Withdrawal Of Deposited Amount: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sedative Drugs Like Tramadol Impact Mental Fitness Of Declarant; Bombay High Court Acquits Man Relying On Doubtful Dying Declarations Postal Tracking Report Showing 'Refusal' Not Conclusive Proof Of Service If Denied On Oath: Delhi High Court Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Decide On Legality Of Charging Fees For Downloading FIRs From 'SAANJH' Portal Wife’s Educational Qualifications No Bar To Seeking Maintenance If Actual Employment Is Not Proven: Orissa High Court Mere Telephonic Contact Without Substance Of Conversation Cannot Establish Criminal Conspiracy: Madhya Pradesh High Court Serious Allegations Like HIV/AIDS Imputations Require Corroboration, Cannot Rest Solely On Unsubstantiated Testimony: Karnataka High Court Family Court Cannot Refuse Mutual Consent Divorce Merely Because Parties Are Living Separately 'Without Valid Reason': Kerala High Court Collective Attempts By Advocates To Overbear Presiding Officer Not Protected Professional Conduct: Madras High Court Dismisses Quash Petitions No Legal Evidence Required To Forward A Person To Trial? Rajasthan HC Slams Police For Implicating Accused In NDPS Case Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Accused Must Be Physically Present In Court To Furnish Bonds Under Section 91 BNSS: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court

09 May 2026 10:57 AM

By: sayum


"Since the question involved in the present batch of writ petitions is of National Security, more particularly, with regard to the sensitive area/zone of important installations like Indian Air Force and Indian Army... all permissions granted for constructions within the vicinity of the areas of the said two organizations are required to be strictly adhered to as per the Notifications issued by the Ministry of Defence/Central Government from time to time." Rajasthan High Court, in a significant ruling, has ordered the local authorities in Jodhpur to identify and demolish all illegal constructions raised in the restricted zones surrounding Indian Air Force and Indian Army installations.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma observed that permissions granted for constructions in these sensitive vicinities must strictly comply with the Ministry of Defence guidelines to prevent any "eminent threat" to national security.

The court was dealing with a batch of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) highlighting the mushrooming of unauthorized buildings in the Pabupura area of Jodhpur, specifically within the prohibited boundaries of military bases. The petitioners alleged that local bodies like the Jodhpur Development Authority (JDA) had granted construction permissions in gross violation of the Works of Defence Act 1903 and various notifications issued by the Central Government.

Primary Legal Issues Before The Court

The primary question before the court was whether the local authorities had the power to grant construction permissions in restricted zones surrounding vital military installations without adhering to the Ministry of Defence's guidelines. The court was also called upon to determine the legal consequences of constructions raised in the vicinity of these installations without the mandatory 'No Objection Certificates' (NOCs) from the concerned defence authorities.

National Security Overrides Private Construction Interests

The Court emphasized that the proximity of private constructions to the Air Force Station and Military Training Centre in Jodhpur involves sensitive questions of national security. It noted that the safety of vital installations cannot be compromised by the issuance of construction permissions that disregard the restricted zones established by the Central Government.

Court Mandates Strict Adherence To Defence Notifications

The Bench observed that all permissions granted for constructions within the vicinity of military organizations are required to be strictly adhered to as per the notifications issued by the Ministry of Defence. The Court noted that even if a layout plan has been sanctioned by local authorities, the construction permission is strictly required to be issued only after following mandatory guidelines.

"If the local authorities find that the construction permission(s) have been issued in violation of mandatory guidelines/instructions of the notifications of the Ministry of Defence/Central Government, then such construction permission(s) should be cancelled," the Court held.

Survey And Removal Of Unauthorized Encroachments

Addressing the presence of existing illegal structures, the Court directed the local authorities to undertake a detailed exercise and survey of the area in question. This survey is intended to ascertain whether any constructions have been raised "de hors the guidelines" or in violation of the notifications issued by the Ministry of Defence.

The Court directed that if constructions are found to have been raised in violation of the rules, urgent immediate steps should be taken to remove them in accordance with law. This directive applies specifically to the entire area of Khasra No. 632 and its subdivisions in the Jodhpur district.

Requirement Of No Objection Certificate (NOC)

The Court highlighted the necessity of coordination between local civil bodies and military authorities. It observed that in appropriate cases, local authorities must only grant permission for construction after obtaining an NOC from the concerned defence authorities, provided such a requirement exists under the relevant Central Government notifications.

"The local authorities will also ensure that whether for such constructions, appropriate 'No Objection Certificate(s)' have been taken or not from the Indian Airforce or Indian Army," the Bench observed.

Three-Month Deadline For Compliance

The High Court has set a strict timeline for the execution of its directions, ordering the entire survey and demolition exercise to be completed within a period of three months. The local authorities, including the JDA and the District Collector, are required to furnish a compliance report before the Court on or before August 3, 2026.

The Court further clarified that its order includes taking appropriate action for the removal of persons who are unauthorizedly occupying the area or land in the vicinity of the restricted military zones. With these directions, the Court disposed of the writ petitions and the connected contempt proceedings.

The ruling reinforces the legal principle that national security considerations take precedence over local urban development permissions. By mandating the removal of illegal structures near the Jodhpur military installations, the High Court has underscored the mandatory nature of the Works of Defence Act 1903 and Central Government notifications in protecting sensitive strategic zones.

Date of Decision: 23 April 2026

 

Latest Legal News