Bombay High Court Holds Land Acquisition Of 7 Hectares For Mumbai's Atal Setu Project Lapsed, Orders Compensation Under New Act

Days after the Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link (MTHL), the longest sea-bridge in India, the Bombay High Court declared that the land acquisition proceedings for a part of the project had lapsed.

While this would mean possession of the 7.13 hectares land should revert back to its original owner, in the present case, the owners agreed to accept compensation recalculated under the new Land Acquisition Act 2013.

“Once this is the statement made by Mr. Thakur, we hold that even though we have opined that the acquisition has lapsed, possession of the acquired lands shall not revert to the Petitioners, and they will only be entitled to compensation for their lands, and which shall be determined by the State by passing a fresh Award/s qua the Petitioners after following the procedure and the provisions as laid down under the 2013 Act.”

A division bench comprising Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice M.M. Sathaye allowed a batch of writ petitions challenging the award dated 22 April 2015 passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) Raigad under the old land acquisition act from 1984. Under the act, seven hectares of their lands were acquired for the MTHL project.

The court held that as per Section 24(1)(a) and Section 25 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, compensation of all land acquisitions initiated under the old land acquisition Act, ought to have been passed within one year from 1 January 2014 (when the new land Act came into force).

In the present case, after excluding the period of stay on the act granted by the Aurangabad Bench, the award had to be passed by 20 March 2015.

"In the present case, the award was passed much later, namely on 22 April 2015 and therefore, not being within a period of 1 year from 1 January 2014 (even after exclusion of the period of stay) the present acquisition proceedings only qua the petitioners' lands have clearly lapsed," the court said.

The court rejected the argument of the State that since it had invoked the urgency clause under Section 17, there was no question of the acquisition proceedings lapsing. It held that the vesting of land and lapsing of acquisition cannot co-exist.

Justice Colabawalla, relied on the SC judgement in M/s Delhi Airtech Services Pvt Ltd & Anr regarding the applicability of the urgency clause invoked by the State Government.

"In the facts of the present case admittedly there has been no compliance of Section 17(3-A) and once this is the case, the land does not vest absolutely with the State and hence if the Award is not passed within the time frame as stipulated by law, the acquisition would lapse," the bench observed.

Advocate Rahul Thakur, representing the petitioners, told the court that while they are not pressing for return of possession, the petitioners should be granted compensation under the 2013 Act. The court accepted this statement and directed the state to determine compensation as per the 2013 Act.

The court noted the project has been planned to improve connectivity between Mumbai city and Navi Mumbai through a 22 km long six-lane bridge. The petitioners had challenged the acquisition of their land at Jasai village in Raigad district for the project.

The court rejected the state's argument that strong opposition by landowners for measurement led to delay in passing the award. It also held that there was no inordinate delay in filing the petitions.

Appearances - Advocates Rahul Thakur, Sanket Thakur, Sushmita Bhoir

AGP M.S. Bane for State-Respondent

Advs Ashutosh Kulkarni a/w Akshay Kulkarni for CIDCO.

Advocate Akshay Shinde for MMRDA

Case Title - Sandesh Vitthal Thakur & Ors. Vs The Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) Raigad & Ors.

Case Number - WRIT PETITION NO.1712 OF 2018

Click Here To Read/Download Order