Demolition of Army towers stalled amid legal battles, administrative delays

More than four months after a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court delivered its verdict admitting writ appeals filed by apartment owners against the court’s original judgment of February 3, 2025, there has been no progress in the demolition and reconstruction of Chander Kunj Army Towers at Vyttila even as the originally agreed timelines now lie in tatters.

On September 10, 2025, the High Court passed its verdict on writ appeals filed by apartment owners, accepting most of their demands. However, the district committee led by the District Collector, constituted to oversee the execution of the court order, has not convened for nearly three months as the district administration was fully occupied with the conduct of local body polls. With the Assembly election likely to be notified next month, the matter is expected to remain on the back burner for an extended period.

Adding to the delay, an apartment owner, Ciby George, has filed a contempt of court petition against the District Collector over the failure of the Army Welfare Housing Organisation (AWHO) to pay him advance rent and relocation charges. He has refused to vacate his apartment, while the remaining 207 owners have already moved out, delaying the handover of the towers for demolition.

The AWHO has further dragged the matter by filing a special leave petition in the Supreme Court against the High Court verdict, though the apex court has directed it to coordinate with the district committee.

“All timelines set for demolition, reconstruction and handover of apartments now stand violated. There is no professional organisational structure or a clear delivery plan. Even the Request for Quotation for selecting the project management consultant and demolition contractor has yet to be published. Neither is there a project office nor a full-time project director on the client’s side to ensure seamless progress,” said sources with the Chander Kunj Army Towers Apartment Owners Association (CATAOA).

Deputy Collector K. Manoj, a member of the district committee, admitted to delays and disruption of timelines, attributing them to the contempt petition filed by Mr. George against the Collector. The court has asked the Collector to produce documents showing whether the pending rent and relocation charges have been paid before posting the case for its next hearing on January 30.

The prolonged delay is prompting more apartment owners to opt for a buyback option at roughly the same price they originally paid, depriving them of any return on their investment. During a recent meeting with the Collector, CATAOA representatives suggested forming a smaller working committee that could meet weekly to review progress, since convening the 20-member district committee regularly is not feasible. The association also emphasised the urgent need to appoint a project director with substantial professional experience in handling high-value projects worth around ₹300 crore, the estimated cost of demolishing and reconstructing the towers.