“You were just a pawn in the hands of Organized Criminals”

An Open Letter to Adv. Virag Tulzapurkar

Dear Adv.Virag Tulzapurkar,

Congratulations on your victory in Kalpataru Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Others [W.P (L) 3646 of 2019] (Hereinafter referred to as ‘Kalpataru’).

When the sole motive for an advocate is to win a case, the chances of ‘miscarriage of Justice’ exponentially increases. It also increases the risk to the entire profession that could be brought to disrepute by the act of one.

You might be wondering why I am writing this open letter on your victory. It is because with this victory you also have

(i)           exposed the deep rooted nexus of Airports Authority of India (AAI) with the Builders Lobby and how the State (officials) is running an Organised Crime Racket

(ii)         exposed millions of lives to a catastrophe waiting to happen and especially those in the slums around Mumbai Airport

If you read through this letter, you will realize how you (and perhaps the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Adv.Anil Singh) were just pawns in the hands of an Organised Crime Racket that used your services to con the High Court of Bombay to convert a criminal and illegal act into a perfectly legal act.

What is it with the height of Buildings around the airport?

Of the various modes of transport, Air travel is one of the fastest. It connects countries and continents. It is one of the most complicated operations when compared to the other modes of transport. For smooth operations there has to be some uniformity and for uniformity there has to be some basic standards. The States understood this need and signed the Convention on International Civil Aviation and the organisation that administers and governs this convention is the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). ICAO basically standardises minimum requirements for smooth Air operations. Airports are the nerve centres for Air Transport and therefore, require a huge level of standardisation. ICAO Annex 14 deals with Aerodromes and sets the standards for design and operations.

For smooth operations of Airports one of the basic need is to have free movement of aircraft in and out of airports and therefore flight paths need to be protected. ICAO provides for certain area to be protected which is a 20 km radius of an airport. Any penetration into these areas are called obstacles which are defined as all fixed (temporary or permanent) and mobile objects or parts thereof that are located on an area intended for the surface movement of aircraft or that extend above a defined surface intended to protect aircraft in fight. These areas are technically referred to as the ‘Obstacle Limitation Surface’ (OLS).

Whenever there is an Obstacle, the Certificate holder shall give Aeronautical Information Services (AIS) and shall arrange for Air Traffic Control (ATC) and the Flight Operations unit to receive immediate notice detailing any projection into the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces.

Of the various areas, the Approach and the Inner Horizontal Surface (I.H.S) are the most critical. Worldwide, the I.H.S is 45m plus Aerodrome Elevation and in India, through the 2015 Rules, the I.H.S is 90m plus Aerodrome Elevation. What is worse is that India did not make a mandatory declaration with the ICAO that it has raised its I.H.S to 90m.

The OLS is important both to ensure free movement of Aircrafts as well as proper functioning of Navigational Equipment. The ATC relies on Navigational equipment to get information on the location of the aircraft. When there are obstacles, there is a chance that navigational data is affected because some of the signals bounce off these structures.

In Mangalore, the accident per se did not occur because of any ‘obstacle’, but the deaths were caused by the ‘obstacle’. The rules requires every equipment in the operational area to be made of frangible material. That means all these objects on an impact with aircraft should not cause any threat to the aircraft. One of the most important equipment in any airport is the Instrument Landing System (ILS) which is always placed at the end of runway so as to properly guide an aircraft to land at the runway. This equipment has to be frangible. In Mangalore, the ILS was a frangible but because there was a downward slope, in order to have the ILS at the same height of the runway, the ILS was mounted over a concrete structure (almost the height of a ground plus one floor height). The Aircraft, after overshooting the runway came down and hit this ‘obstacle’ that caused fire which killed 158 people. In 2006, the AAI in its Safety Hazard study, identified this structure as dangerous, gave it the highest risk rating, concluded it to cause hull loss and fatal injuries and did nothing about the structure. 4 years later, this ‘obstacle’ killed 158 people. The AAI, immediately got into action and now this structure is buried below ground as the slope is levelled and now only the frangible ILS is seen at the end of runway, but the cost paid was with 158 lives, 158 ruined families.

The filing of PIL 86 of 2014 [Yeshwanth Shenoy Vs. Union of India & Others]

I moved the Bombay High Court highlighting the ‘obstacle’ profile around the Mumbai airport based on a few newspaper reports. The then DGM (Aviation Safety) Ms.Mangala Narasimhan was made a party. On the basis of newspaper reports, I went to meet this officer, who threw me out of her office assuming I was some lawyer who came to file a frivolous PIL and make money from the builders. However, I had done my research and I did find out that the Aviation Safety Office is an independent office under the Safety Management Systems requirements.

The first question I faced from the Bench was why had I made Ms.Mangala Narasimhan a Party when AAI was already a party. I had to explain to the Bench this aspect of aviation. The Judges were convinced and directed every party including Respondent No.5 to file replies. I was the happiest when I found almost a 1000 page reply from Ms.Mangala which contained several AAI documents. Later, the matter was heard by another Bench which again asked this question and directed me to replace Ms.Mangala Narasimhan with the regional office of the AAI at Mumbai. However, since I already got the documents, I was not much bothered to challenge this aspect as I wanted to win the war and not worry about losing a battle.

In spite of having the documents, it was extremely difficult to take the Judges through the technicality of the subject matter. I made airport models with thermocol and explained in the Court as to why these ‘obstacles’ are dangerous. Finally, the Hon’ble Court decided to have a ‘committee’ look into my allegations and for the first time the newspapers reported this development. I received a call from a person who had a copy of 160 notices issued by GVK [the majority partner in the Aerodrome Operator Mumbai International Airport Private Ltd (MIAPL)] to several buildings and for the first time I had solid proof in my hand on the presence of ‘obstacles’.

The Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA), the DGCA, the AAI and MIAPL all supressed the fact of ‘obstacles’ in the Court for about 20 months. With the new evidence in my hand, I filed a Notice of Motion which opened a can of worms. MIAPL, now pushed to the corner, submitted the ‘obstacle study’ of 2010-2011 with 137 ‘obstacles’ just in the APPROACH Area. The Court was shocked and ordered a stay on all constructions around the Airport in the I.H.S area. MIAPL submitted its 2015-2016 ‘obstacle study’ which had 467 obstacles only in the APPROACH Area. The Court ordered the DGCA to act under the 1994 Rules and demolish obstacles, but the Senior Judge handling this matter also retired and many things changed thereafter.

The order in PIL 86 of 2014 not brought to the notice of the Court

While I read the entire order in Kalpataru, I did not see one reference to the order of the High Court of Bombay in Yeshwanth Shenoy Vs. Union of India & Others [PIL 86 of 2014]. You appeared for the Petitioners in NM 88/2017 in PIL 86/2014. Why is the order in PIL 86/2014 important?

From 2014, it took me several hearings to enlighten and convince the court on the technicalities involved and finally in September of 2016, a stay was granted against construction of buildings in the 4 km radius of the Mumbai Airport. Several Writ Petitions filed by the Builders came to be tagged along with the matter and several Notice of Motions too came to be filed by builders. The Court had passed several orders, some of which directed the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to follow the procedure of law and demolish illegal heights. PIL 86/2014 was disposed off on the most unbelievable legal reasoning. Para 21 records the reasoning for the disposal as under:

“The present PIL was concerning the very same issue, but when it was filed, this Court did not have the benefit of the 2015 Rules. Now that these Rules are in place, it is in the fitness of things that the PIL petitioner gets an opportunity to question them, if so advised. It is in these circumstances that by keeping open the challenge, we dispose of this PIL. Accordingly, it stands disposed of.”

PIL 86/2014 was filed on the basis of 2010 Rules of AAI that regulated the Building Heights. The court clearly recorded several buildings and structures violated these Rules. Para 20 of the order in PIL 86/2014 is reproduced below:

“20. On 3rd August 2015, this Court had passed an order observing that the PIL raises certain very important issues regarding aircraft safety and safety of the residents staying near the Airport. This Court noted that according to the petitioner, the Airport Regulatory Authority appears to have violated some of the regulations and has permitted increase of illegal height of the buildings around the Airport which has resulted in obstruction when aircrafts take off/land at Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport as also Domestic Airport. This Court also observed that certain other issues regarding safety norms to be followed have been raised. At that time, this Court observed that the pleadings are complete. When that order was passed, there was no notification notifying the Rules.”

It is clear that the Court did find illegalities under the 2010 Rules and since the Petition was also filed under 2010 Rules, the Court didn’t have to apply the 2015 Rules. However, the very basis of disposal of the Writ Petition was that the Petitioner has to file a fresh Petition based on the 2015 Rules and if he so chooses, to challenge the Rules as well. This is probably the first time, anywhere in the country, such an order was passed.

Rule of Law Vs. Practice and Procedures

Rule of Law is a concept that looks good in books and for lectures in law school. The practice of Law is so very different and this meant Rule of Law need not be upheld at all times.

I filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court did not think it fit to interfere because the order under challenge had just asked me to file afresh and was unwilling to look into the travesty of Justice that happened at the High Court of Bombay in PIL 86/2014.

I came back to High Court of Bombay and filed a fresh PIL which was numbered PIL (L) 3256 of 2019. There was also another PIL filed by Ms.Mangala Narasimhan on the same issue. Ms.Mangala was the whistle blower employee of the AAI, who was terminated during the course of proceedings. These PIL’s didn’t see the light of the day because it was assigned to the same Judge who passed the final order in PIL 86/2014. I did my best to get the matter for hearing as it concerned serious threat to safety and lives of people, but the system simply doesn’t give even the slightest chance for me (or people like Ms.Mangala) to push through just for a hearing. Justice (Retd) Deepak Gupta in his farewell speech said, “Our laws and our legal system are totally geared in favour of rich and the powerful”. To understand the weight of that sentence, you do not have to go anywhere else, but just have to see what has happened to PIL 86/2014 and the connected matters.

I had the entire cream of the Bombay Bar appear for one or the other builder. It was never a problem, because I was so thorough with the subject matter and it being a technical matter, I knew none of them would get enough time to dedicate to issue study this issue in detail and I always had control atleast on the subject matter if not the ‘tactics’ in the Courts. When the Ghatkoper crash happened or when PK 8303 crashed in Pakistan, I got text messages from several of those members of the Bar who appeared on the other side saying that my words in the Court rings in their ears. ASG Adv.Anil Singh asked his junior if Shenoy was right when he hit turbulence while travelling by Air!!!

AAI, the Height Rules and the forming of the Organised Crime syndicate

AAI keeps on making notifications under Sec.9A of the Aircraft Act, 1934 to regulate the height of the Buildings. However, once PIL 86/2014 generated heat, the Rule making was more an effort to wriggle out of legal issues than actually regulating Heights. PIL 86/2014 was based on the 2010 Rules. The AAI was aware I had them on the mat and wanted to wriggle out of it and the entire 2015 Rules was made just to justify their past acts. They struggled with it for a long time until the Judge who disposed of PIL 86/2014 decided to give them the lifeline. However, when the dust settled AAI was also aware that every finger will soon be pointing towards them. The Air space over Mumbai is more or less a mine field. Every aircraft flying in Mumbai Airspace is a missile for the people on the ground and a ‘flying coffin’ for the passengers.

AAI had set up an expert panel to study the implications of ‘obstacles’ on Mumbai Airspace. The Study report of AAI suggested following actions:

1)   With the existing obstacles and terrain profile, situation in and around Mumbai airport has already become difficult. Any further deterioration in the obstacle profile in and around the airport is likely to aggravate the situation. It is therefore essential that obstacle profile in and around airport is maintained so that further deterioration in performance of Navaids is avoided

2)   NOC cases for new constructions in and around Mumbai Airport need to be examined carefully and no relaxation should be given for height clearance.

The AAI since 2008 were ‘playing with fire’ and approved buildings with extra heights. The AAI had devised a plan where no single officer could be singled out and ensured the involvement of the entire chain so as to ensure there is no checks and balance system working to put the red flag out. This is where the perfect crime was designed and executed. This is where the Organised Crime syndicate took Birth. They formed something called the Appellate Committee for Height Clearances. It was to be headed by the Jt.Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA), a representative of the DGCA (normally a Jt.DG), a member of the AAI and an external member (Ex DG of the DGCA Kanu Gohain). This Organised Crime Syndicate was ‘legalised’ through the 2015 Rules. However, the conflict was never questioned. In case of ‘obstacles’, an order of demolition is given by the Jt.DG under the 1994 Rules. If the Jt.DG is a member of the Appellate committee, would he order demolition of a building which he himself authorised. The Jt.Secretary of MoCA also is the Vigilance officer for the MoCA and there is no way anyone could have filed a vigilance case.

The expert panel was appointed by the AAI when it found the functioning of Navaids deteriorate. However, this business of approvals of illegal height was so lucrative because the Real Estate around the Airport was one of the most expensive and the Appellate Committee was now functioning smooth and they could easily get the builders in other cities like Bangalore, kolkatta etc too. So in spite of the recommendations of the expert committee, the Appellate committee decided to raise the I.H.S of Mumbai to 90 m plus Aerodrome Elevation and incorporated it in the 2015 Rules.

The Kalpataru case : The last nail in the Coffin

Why is Kalpataru tilting the scales towards the red on safety? Let me explain. The Judgment per se doesn’t have any illegality. I doubt if AAI would go to the Supreme Court, and even if it did, I do not see the Judgment to have any infirmity in it to let the Hon’ble Supreme Court overturn the order. The order is based on a simple premise that the Rules that need to be followed is the Rules in force and not draft Rules.

This Judgment is the last nail in the coffin in which ‘safety’ rests in peace. Through this order, AAI is to sanction height which it clearly knows will threaten safety, but this act will not result in the finger of suspicion on any officer as the same is made under the orders of the Court. If the same permission is granted in the absence of such an order, then it would be a criminal act and this is something the AAI officers fully knew because they are experts on Aviation.

Had the Hon’ble Court followed the same principle in Kalpataru as in PIL 86/2014, then the result would have been different. But why would the Hon’ble Court follow a wrong precedent that was applied only in one case i.e PIL 86/2014. Therefore, the Court cannot be held to be in the wrong as far as the outcome of Kalpataru is concerned. For good Administration of Justice, the lawyers on either side act as the Wheels of the cart, and if those wheels itself do not function as it ought to be, you cannot blame the cart for failing to move.

Kalpataru Ltd and their consistent history of non compliance

Kalpataru had a project in Ghatkopher called ‘Aura’. While the same was being built, the AAI identifies that the building is straight in the ‘Approach Path’ and it writes a letter to MIAPL in 2011. What happened thereafter, is not known but when the list of ‘obstacles’ came, it mentioned this very building. What is even more interesting is that the list showed ‘aeronautical study’ having been done. Aeronautical Study is PROHIBITED in the APPROACH. Therefore, whatever has happened there is a criminal act and needs to be investigated. I have complained to the police, the CBI and I have made both of them parties in another PIL still pending before the Bombay High Court.

While PIL 86/2014 was pending, I was keenly watching the Appellate Study reports uploaded on the website by the AAI. I did find irregularity with another Kalpataru project and I believe it is the same as is involved in this case too. It was too close to the Radar and I did bring it to the notice of the Court as the Court directed me to specifically raise the projects that seriously jeopardise safety.

So Kalpataru always had many of its project run in with the AAI and there is someone in AAI who is guiding this Builder as to how to circumvent the law.

The role of AAI – Not just playing with Rules, but with the Courts

AAI was not just playing with Rules, they were playing with the Courts too. To manage PIL 86/2014, they brought in 2015 Rules. Now, to come out of the mess created by them in 2015, they have come out with the 2018 draft rules and it will soon be made as a Rule. Sec.9A of the Aircraft Act, 1934 allows the AAI the right to come out with Rules as and when they please and this is exactly the reason why I made my PIL (L) 3256 of 2019, Rule proof. I only referred to Sec. 9A of the Aircraft Rules and ensured that the different Rules do not impact the petition, a lesson I learnt from the disposal of PIL 86/2014. AAI played with lives of people by playing with its Rules, but that is not the only games they played, they played the Courts too.

In PIL 86/2014, while I repeatedly told the court that the Aeronautical Study reports were not made public, the Court had ordered it to be submitted in the Court. When Justice V.M.Kanade retired and the matter reached other Judges, the AAI made it a ‘norm’ of submitting all the Aeronautical Study reports in the Court and later claim the same to have been ‘approved’ by the Court. So for the records now, all building heights granted by the AAI and Appellate Committee in 2015-16 and later are on the ‘Approval of the Bombay High Court’!!!

Even after disposal of PIL 86/2014, the AAI didn’t want to take any risk and therefore they moved Chamber orders with tons of Aeronautical Study reports and the Court continued to pass orders. On 28 June 2018, a small aircraft crashed into the Ghatkoper area exactly in the manner I described in the court and in my pleadings. On 29 June 2018, one of those Chamber order came up before the same Judge who disposed PIL 86 of 2014. Nobody had to utter a single word, it was written all over the face of the Judge. AAI lawyers had nothing to say, the Judge roared into their ears that if they come up with such applications to the court, he would not allow even one centimetre of extra height. Thereafter, no lawyer wanted to go to that court for AAI with the chamber orders and that was the end of it. AAI was asked to file an Affidavit, which was never filed and that matter was withdrawn from the court!!!

Thankfully, for Mumbai, on 28 June 2018, it was a small aircraft and therefore there was only 5 body bags. What people do not know is the fact that it was an under-construction site only because there was no construction allowed in the area because of the 2016 stay order. Had the stay not been there, there would have been a 12 floor structure at the site. I did personally visit the site and had the building and residents been there, we would have had our 9/11 style of accident. Can anyone even imagine the scenario where instead of the small aircraft, it was a Boeing or an Airbus? I have earlier too said that the 28 June 2018 crash is only a trailer and the movie is yet to be released. It would be catastrophic when a Big Bird crashes into the slums of Mumbai be it on Ghatkoper side, Andheri Side, Kurla Side, Santacruz side or the Bandra Side. It’s a ticking time bomb set to explode.

AAI is now staring at faulty Navigation systems

The buildings are not just physical obstacles. They also become obstacles to radar and various other navigation systems. During the course of hearing in PIL 86/2014, it was very clear that the functioning of many of the Navigation systems were deteriorated because of these buildings. When did the ‘obstacle’ start becoming an issue? If anyone stands over any of the flyovers in and around Andheri, Ghatkoper, Kurla etc you will see all old buildings have a uniform height. They are buildings of the era when laws were strictly followed. The new buildings that stand tall are mostly the outcome of ‘illegalities’. When the whole scam started, it was a closely held secret at AAI. No one realised that it will go out of hand at that time because they were only playing with figures on file. The problem became a pain when buildings started to come up and other builders pointed out at these buildings while asking for more height. The whole business of Aeronautical Study started and first it was done by foreign experts brought in by AAI. Later even these experts got worried because of the number of buildings and the AAI took over this business.

Too many buildings came up, the pain became too much for AAI and since the common man was neither aware of the danger nor were they aware of corruption, the AAI, the DGCA, the MoCA came out with steps to save their skin by making various documents to show safety on papers. Since no one questioned, the organised crime involving MoCA, AAI, DGCA, MIAPL and the Builders were going fine. Like every Bollywood movie, one of the honest officers makes an entry and stands up to question their act. That is where the story of Ms.Mangala Narasimhan starts. She was the DGM (NOC) at AAI, who refused to sign off the extra heights for a building that was just 600 mtrs from the end of main runway which means the first obstacle was just 6 seconds away from take off. She was immediately transferred and was asked to sit as DGM (Aviation Safety). The effect of her going to that office exactly was the same effect of T.N.Shesan becoming the Chief Election Commissioner. She started pulling her own officers, the MIAL officials and everyone else to task. She was illegally transferred and was finally terminated by AAI, a price too high for an individual to pay, but often paid by many honest officers in this country.

The effect of these buildings on Navigational Aids is also on record. The AAI has conducted a study to check the deterioration in performance of the NAVAIDS particularly at Mumbai Airport due to terrain in its close proximity and also due obstacles penetrating the OLS of that airport. The study report reflects that:-

1)   AAI is finding it difficult to meet the standard siting criteria for installation of CNS facilities due to existence of several hills very near to airport and the airport being in the midst of the city.

 2)   The performance of navigational aids is also being affected, for

a)   ILS runway 09 coverage is restricted at lower levels.

b) ILS Glidepath 14 is not meeting coverage requirement at lower levels.

c) DVOR, Mumbai abrupt change of Radial observed between 110 Deg. to 150 Deg.”

Legalising a Criminal Act through intervention of Court

The AAI is run by officers who are experts in Aviation. The very fact that they rejected the application of Kalpataru is a clear admission of the fact that the building will affect the Navigational Aids. It is altogether a different aspect that the AAI officers rejected the application under a ‘proposed rule’.

These very officers of AAI deal with many litigation and they have in house legal team. How would they reject an application based on a ‘proposed Rule’? Were they not aware of the fact that a rejection under a proposed rule will not stand the scrutiny of law? Yet they decide to reject the application under a ‘proposed rule’. For anyone, that should be the first sign of an unfair play. I am absolutely certain that Adv.Anil Singh would have told the AAI officers that their act will not stand the scrutiny of law. What happened in the court room is just for ‘public consumption’. What happened here is that two very senior members of the Bar became pawns in the hands of an Organised Crime Syndicate run by the State (officials) alongwith builders who played a con on the High Court. What criminal acts were legalised ? Here is the list:

Under the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against Safety of Civil Aviation Act, 1982, Sec 4 makes the destruction / damage to Air Navigation facilities a criminal Act. Sec. 4 is as under:

4. Destruction of, or damage to, air navigation facilities.—(1) Whoever unlawfully and intentionally destroys or damages air navigation facilities or interferes with their operation in such a manner as is likely to endanger the safety of the aircraft in flight shall be punished with imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine.

(2) Whoever attempts to commit, or abets the commission of, any offence under sub-section (1) shall also be deemed to have committed such offence and shall be punished with the punishment provided for such offence.

The very fact of rejection of the Kalpataru application is an admission of the fact that it will destroy / damage Air Navigation Facilities. Had they allowed the application of Kalpataru, these officers would have committed this offence and they were clearly aware that they would be caught. It is to come out of such a scenario, this dirty route was planned and executed.

What these officers are doing also falls under Sec. 300 (4) of the Indian Penal Code. Murder doesn’t always require intention, even knowledge of a fact is more than sufficient to attract the offence of Murder. These officers of the State working for MoCA, DGCA and AAI are all aware of their act and its consequences. They are technically qualified or just by efflux of time are very well aware of their acts and its consequences.

300. Murder.—Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or—

(Fourthly) —If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.

The officers of the State have conspired with the Builders and this has been the most perfect organised crime run by the State (officials). The State may not be aware, but its officers are and they are in a position to run this scam without being caught is only because of the positions they occupy. If the State has failed to identify the Organised crime, the State has failed in its duty to protect its citizens.

With this order from the Court, the State has ensured that their criminal act is legalised. The fact that millions of other lives are endangered doesn’t make a difference to these officials. This is where there is no difference between terrorists and these officials of the MoCA, DGCA, AAI & MIAPL. The acts of these officers have ensured that each aircraft flying is a missile. For a terrorist, just keeping an explosive device is a crime irrespective of whether it explodes or not, kills or not. Similarly, these officers should also be prosecuted for having converted every aircraft into a missile that could potentially kill.

When you are 130 crore people, a few lives don’t matter……..

In Mangalore, 158 lives made no difference because those lives were of labourers. In Ghatkoper, 5 lived made no difference because these were middle class tax paying citizens. There are a few politicians who died in crashes, but most of them were in helicopters or small aircrafts and people thought it was an accident. I can assure you there are not many accidents in Aviation, there are only failures. Here the failure is an intended one, in fact a planned one in many ways. The sacrifice made by Ms.Mangala means nothing to you, My work meant nothing to you. I spent every penny from my hard-earned money. I refused to even look at the money offers from the builders lobby which was far higher than what even the highest paid members of the bar would not make in their lifetime. I was given death threats, but I did not budge because the image that refused to go away was that of a 8 yr old girl in the arms of a fireman in the aftermath of the Mangalore crash. I feel responsible for my country men and we can be a better country only when we are willing to stand up for others. Always remember, the fight taken up by people like me or Ms.Mangala are not for us alone, but also to protect your life and that of your dear ones too. A crash in Mumbai or Delhi may not take the lives of just commoners. That day is not too far now. An accident in Pakistan, killing its citizens caused damage to it beyond its territories. India will not be far behind. It is the reputation of a Nation that is at stake. We are as corrupt as Pakistan or any third world nation. Aviation is one of the dirtiest as of now. If an air carrier of USA or the EU meets with an accident in Mumbai, its is not going to be just the MoCA, DGCA or AAI that will be a subject of scrutiny. The role of Courts too will be under Scrutiny, but it will be more as to how easy it was for the rich and powerful to manipulate a system. There is too much in the files of PIL 86/2014 and other connected matters.

Kalpataru is just an indicator on the total destruction of the Mumbai Airspace. It was not picked up by the Court as the Court did not have the assistance of ‘effective counsels’ while discharging its duty. Justice Colabawala was a part of the Bench and he was also a part of the Bench when I made the most detailed argument in PIL 86/2014 as to how the air space of Mumbai was in danger. If these facts were known to him, I am certain he would never have let this to happen.

Sir, you might have a victory under your belt, but it will be the people who will have to pay with their lives for this victory. I do not see this victory of yours as a victory, I see you were just a pawn in the hands of an organised crime syndicate that had very different idea and plans. You have just unknowingly helped this gang of terrorists who could potentially harm you, your near & dear ones, your fellow citizens.

                                                                                  Yours Truly,

                                                                                 Yeshwanth Shenoy