MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Expedite Drone Survey Permissions for Heritage Assessment in Chandigarh: Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Court mandates prompt actions and adherence to deadlines for IIT Roorkee’s evaluation project amid red zone restrictions and bureaucratic delays.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has mandated expedited actions concerning the drone survey for the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) in Chandigarh. The directive, issued on May 28, 2024, emphasizes the need for swift permissions and strict adherence to project timelines by IIT Roorkee, highlighting the importance of evaluating the city’s historical architecture amidst bureaucratic delays and red zone complications.

Project Status and Delays: The court reviewed a status report from IIT Roorkee’s Registrar, Prashant Garg, detailing the progress and challenges faced in conducting the necessary assessments. The report noted that visual evaluations and preliminary site visits had been completed, and non-destructive testing (NDT) activities were underway for multiple buildings. The final reports for these evaluations are scheduled for completion by July 2024.

Drone Survey Challenges: A significant point of contention was the delay in obtaining clearance for a drone survey, crucial for acquiring Geographic Information System (GIS) data needed for the HIA report. Despite an application submitted to the Ministry of Civil Aviation on May 25, 2024, permissions remained pending due to the site’s red zone designation. The proposed drone operations initially scheduled for late May were postponed, further affecting the project timeline.

“The clearance to fly drones in the site due to red zone implications is stated to have not been received,” the court observed, stressing the need for immediate action. The court also emphasized the importance of coordination among various authorities, stating, “We direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Chandigarh, to issue necessary instructions to all concerned so that necessary permission is granted.”

The court underscored the project’s significance, highlighting the balance between bureaucratic processes and timely project completion. The judgment emphasized that delays in the drone survey directly impacted the HIA, a critical component for future preservation and development plans in Chandigarh. The court mandated the Ministry of Civil Aviation and local authorities to expedite the necessary permissions and provide a clear timeline for the project’s completion.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court’s directive aims to accelerate the Heritage Impact Assessment project in Chandigarh, addressing bureaucratic hurdles and ensuring timely completion. This judgment underscores the importance of heritage conservation while navigating the complexities of modern regulatory frameworks. The court’s emphasis on prompt action and adherence to deadlines is expected to set a precedent for future projects involving heritage assessments and urban planning.

Date of Decision: May 28, 2024

Vinod Dhatterwal and others Vs. Union of India and others

Latest Legal News