The bench also questioned how the collector of Raigad district, where Alibaug is situated, had decided to exempt Modi's bungalow from demolition.
It was hearing a petition filed by activist Surendra Dhavale seeking that the court direct the authorities to demolish all unauthorised construction "within the low and high tide areas" in a bunch of villages in Alibaug.
As per the petition, such construction had been carried out in violation of the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority rules and the land laws of the state.
There are around 175 such private residences in CRZ areas in villages such as Varsoli, Sasvane, Kolgaon and Dokvade, among others, in Alibaug taluka, belonging to several "wealthy persons including Nirav Modi, and several businessmen and film actors", the PIL claimed.
In compliance with a previous order of the bench, Raigad collector Vijay Suryavanshi filed an affidavit on Tuesday.
In the affidavit, Suryavanshi said that the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) concerned had referred a total of 159 cases of alleged illegal construction in Alibaug to the Maharashtra Coastal Management Zone Authority.
In the affidavit, he said that 12 of these were demolished, land records of several others were still being ascertained, and it was found that Modi's bungalow was not in violation of any norms.
As per the affidavit, Modi's bungalow was constructed prior to 1986-- before the coastal zone norms were ratified for the Raigad area, and therefore, it couldn't be held in any violation.
The collector's office also submitted that since the said bungalow had now been attached by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), it could not take any action.
The bench, however, took strong exception to the above submissions.
"The affidavit merely states that Mr Modi's bungalow was constructed prior to 1986. But what is the basis of this finding? Is there any land record or official document to affirm the same?" the bench asked.
"Also, what use is the statement that the collector's office can't take action in view of the CBI having attached the property? The collector is not helpless," the bench said.
The bench also noted that, through an order passed in June this year, the SDO had dropped all proceedings against Modi's bungalow and closed the file.
"How was it the SDO's prerogative to close the file? The manner in which the local authorities are behaving when it comes to this bungalow is forcing us to direct the principal secretary of the state Revenue Department to initiate an inquiry in the case," the bench said, while posting the matter to Thursday for passing of orders.
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.