The Bombay High Court has dismissed five petitions seeking additional compensation for land acquired in Thane district for the Mumbai-Nagpur Samruddhi Expressway, ruling that the claimants had voluntarily accepted compensation agreements covering the agricultural portions of their land.
A division bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat rejected the petitions concerning land acquired during 2019-20 for the highway project.
“This court finds substance in the contention of the respondents (state government) that the present petitions have not been filed to air a genuine grievance of land owners/farmers and that the petitions have been orchestrated by individuals and entities involved in the business of land deals,” the bench observed.
The petitioners argued that while they had received compensation for agricultural land in two Thane villages, portions reserved for internal roads and open spaces were acquired by the government “virtually free of cost”. They sought additional payment for those parcels.
However, the court agreed with the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC) that concerns arose over the manner in which some claims had been presented. In certain cases, holders of power of attorney (PoA) had made statements about circumstances that the court noted could only have been known to the original landowners.
“The whole frame of the petitions is rendered suspicious due to such defective pleadings,” the judges said.
Compensation Agreements Already Accepted
Land acquisition and compensation agreements were signed between landowners and the state government in August 2019 and August 2020. Compensation for the acquired agricultural land was paid under the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
The court noted that the petitioners had entered into these agreements voluntarily and were aware that land earmarked for internal roads and open spaces was outside the compensation package.
“The petitioners cannot be permitted to wriggle out of the basis of determination and payment of compensation, as per the said agreements,” the court said.
MSRDC argued that the petitions had not been filed by the original landowners, but by assignees or PoA holders after considerable delay. It alleged that certain individuals were making a business of obtaining documents from original landowners and pursuing such claims later.
Lahe Village Case
In one matter, a landowner from Lahe village had received Rs 87.91 lakh for 1,877 sq m acquired for the expressway. His PoA holder later claimed that compensation had been paid for only 410 sq m and that the remaining land, including areas marked for internal roads and open spaces, had not been compensated.
The High Court found no merit in the claim and dismissed the petitions.
The ruling reinforces the importance of the compensation agreements signed during land acquisition for the Samruddhi Expressway and limits attempts to seek additional payment after accepting the agreed terms.
Source: Hindustan Times
