After years of technical back-and-forth and courtroom sparring, the Delhi High Court has finally put its stamp on a sensitive aviation safety dispute involving high-rise towers near Kolkata airport. In a detailed judgment delivered on December 24, the division bench restored an Airports Authority of India (AAI) order restricting the height of a commercial tower, while rejecting the developer’s challenge to the authority’s technical assessment.
Background
The case arose from a real estate project by Shristi Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. at New Town, Rajarhat, roughly seven kilometres from Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport. Because of the proximity to the airport, any construction there required a No Objection Certificate under aviation safety laws.
Read also:- Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects State's Land Acquisition Appeal, Upholds Enhanced
While an early clearance in 2006 allowed both towers of the project to rise up to around 144 metres, delays meant that the permission lapsed. Over the years, aviation safety rules changed, becoming stricter. When Shristi sought renewed clearance for Tower-II, AAI allowed a much lower height, linking it to radar safety norms.
In March 2019, AAI formally informed the developer that Tower-II could not be granted additional height because, together with Tower-I, it formed a “large structure” interfering with radar operations. A single judge of the High Court later set aside this communication, not on technical grounds, but because it lacked detailed reasons.
Both sides appealed.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Declines Arbitration Route in New India Assurance–HDFC Bank Lease Dispute
Court’s Observations
The division bench, after tracing the long procedural history, made one thing clear: courts are not meant to second-guess technical aviation decisions. “The bench observed, ‘Judicial review in such matters is supervisory, not substitutive,’” noting that radar angles, azimuth calculations, and air traffic safety fall squarely within expert territory.
The judges rejected the developer’s argument that AAI relied on a so-called “crude method” to assess the tower cluster. They agreed with the single judge that the actual calculations were carried out using official systems and scientific data, and that private expert reports submitted by the developer had no binding value.
At the same time, the bench disagreed with the single judge on one key point. It held that the March 2019 communication could not be read in isolation. When seen alongside site inspection reports, technical notes, and earlier correspondence, the reasons for rejecting extra height were “clearly traceable from the record”.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Declines Arbitration Route in New India Assurance–HDFC Bank Lease Dispute
Decision
Allowing AAI’s appeal, the High Court restored the 2019 communication restricting the height of Tower-II and set aside the finding that it violated principles of natural justice. The developer’s appeal, challenging the technical conclusions themselves, was dismissed.
In the final result, the Airports Authority’s safety-based assessment stands confirmed, bringing the prolonged dispute to a close, with no order as to costs.
Case Title: Airports Authority of India vs. Shristi Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. & Ors. AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA
Case No.: LPA 1168/2024 with LPA 63/2025
Case Type: Letters Patent Appeals (Aviation Safety / Building Height Restriction near Airport)
Decision Date: 24 December 2025