Army towers: HC removes alleged discriminatory eligibility criteria for rent during displacement period

A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court has set aside the provision that excluded owners of apartments at Chander Kunj Army towers, who had not commenced residence in their apartments, from receiving monthly rent during their displacement.

The Bench comprising Justices Amit Rawal and P.V. Balakrishnan observed in an order dated September 10, 2025 that the Single Bench did not consider the circumstances of defence personnel who, having been allotted government accommodation, may intend to occupy the apartments upon retirement.

There is also a possibility that the officers may have taken loans involving monthly EMIs. In both scenarios, the individuals concerned would be entitled to rent, subject to the district committee’s decision based on the submission of documents regarding demission of office as well as taking the premises on lease/rent, it said.

The contention of the Army Welfare Housing Organisation (AWHO) regarding non-maintainability of claims by a section of apartment owners who have already approached statutory bodies such as the Real Estate Regulatory Authority was also dismissed by the Bench.

The court said that it could not adjudicate monetary damages, as such determinations required detailed evidence and supporting materials. “Since that part has not been discussed or touched upon, much less claimed in the writ petition, we reject the argument of the appellant AWHO,” the bench observed.

The Bench also dismissed the possibility of the AWHO constructing additional floors or areas to generate extra income, based on submissions from the organisation’s counsel affirming that the agency had no such intention. The AWHO has been directed to bear all expenses incurred during the construction period, including any cost escalations.

While the AWHO had initially allocated ₹175 crore for reconstruction, the district committee deemed it insufficient and revised the estimate to ₹211 crore, with assistance from the Public Works department and a structural expert. The court emphasised that apartment owners should not be burdened with filing statutory applications for reconstruction approvals. It is the primary responsibility of the AWHO to submit such applications, and all competent authorities are expected to process them without objection.

The occupancy certificates issued for Towers ‘B’ and ‘C’ shall be kept in abeyance until reconstruction is completed and the towers are reoccupied in order to avoid unnecessary municipal tax liabilities for the owners.