Bombay High Court Orders Fresh Compensation Assessment for Santacruz–Chembur Link Road Land Acquisition

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to carry out a fresh assessment of compensation for land acquired in Kurla for the Santacruz–Chembur Link Road (SCLR) project, holding that a correction made to the land acquisition award after 31 years was legally unsustainable.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Girish Kulkarni and Justice Rajesh Patil ruled that the original 1986 land acquisition award, the 2017 corrigendum, and the subsequent notices issued to the landowners were illegal. The court instructed the authorities to determine the current market value of the land and issue a fresh award in accordance with the Land Acquisition Act, 1984.

Follow MahaENews-X on: Follow MahaENews on Instagram

The case was filed by the legal heirs of Ahmed Izzat Mohammad Hasham Dada, the original owner of a 1,613-square-metre plot in Kurla acquired for the SCLR project. The petitioners argued that although their land had been acquired, they were never served with legal notices, and their names were omitted from the acquisition award issued on September 23, 1986. Instead, notices were allegedly issued to unrelated individuals, and the acquisition process was completed without hearing the actual owners or paying them compensation.

The State government later acknowledged the error and issued a corrigendum in 2017 replacing the names in the original award with those of the petitioners. However, the landowners challenged the correction, arguing that such a substantial change could not legally be made three decades after the award.

Accepting their contention, the High Court observed that authorities had failed to follow the mandatory legal procedure during the acquisition process. The Bench also criticised the conduct of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, stating that negligence had forced the landowners to remain engaged in litigation for over 15 years.

The court further held that only clerical or mathematical mistakes can be corrected under the law, whereas changing the identity of landowners is a fundamental alteration that cannot be rectified through a corrigendum after 31 years.

The Bench noted that although the government had deposited ₹2.72 lakh, including compensation and interest, in compliance with an earlier order passed in 2011, the payment did not cure the legal defects in the acquisition process.

Observing that the acquisition violated the petitioners’ constitutional right to property under Article 300A, the court said the illegal actions of the authorities could not be legitimised merely because possession of the land had already been taken.

While directing fresh compensation, the court clarified that the reassessment should be carried out under the 1984 Land Acquisition Act and not under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The High Court also expressed concern that despite the repeal of the old land acquisition law more than a decade ago, disputes arising under the previous legislation continue to reach the courts due to negligence and procedural lapses by government officials.