Mumbai, April 24: The Bombay High Court has refused to interfere with procedural orders passed in an ongoing land compensation dispute involving Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd, arising out of
land acquisition for the Mumbai–Ahmedabad high-speed rail corridor.
Petitions dismissed by high court
A bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat dismissed two petitions filed by the company, which had challenged orders of the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) Authority.
The authority had allowed the State to file its written statement despite delay and permitted the National High Speed Rail Corporation Ltd (NHSRCL), the implementing agency of the bullet train project, to amend its reply to raise the issue of limitation.
Dispute over compensation claim
The dispute concerns around 10 acres of land in Vikhroli acquired under a 2022 award. While the acquisition itself has attained finality, the present proceedings relate to enhancement of compensation, with the company’s claim rising sharply after amendments — from about Rs 572 crore to nearly Rs 1,972 crore.
Company’s objections
The company argued that the State authorities had repeatedly failed to appear before the LARR Authority and should not have been allowed to file their reply at a late stage. It also opposed NHSRCL’s attempt to introduce a limitation defence nearly two years after filing its initial reply.
State defends delay and amendments
The State, through its advocate Dhruti Kapadia, defended the LARR Authority’s decision to allow its delayed written statement, arguing that there was sufficient cause for the delay.
It submitted that the authority was newly constituted and “no official or institutional mechanism had been established” to represent the Collector’s office in such proceedings, leading to procedural lapses.
The State also pointed out that the petitioner had significantly amended its claim, which justified giving the authorities an opportunity to respond in detail. It maintained that the award itself reflects the State’s position, but a formal reply became necessary after the amendments.
Emphasising that no prejudice was caused to the petitioner, the State argued that the LARR Authority rightly exercised its discretion in the interest of justice.
Court upholds LARR Authority’s approach
Rejecting these contentions, the High Court said the LARR Authority’s approach was justified. It noted that the petitioner itself had amended its claim twice, substantially increasing the compensation sought. In that context, allowing the State to respond could not be termed unfair.
The bench observed that “allowing the applications would be in the interest of justice,” adding that no real prejudice was caused to the company.
Limitation issue and directions
On the limitation issue, the court clarified that the LARR Authority has the power to examine whether a reference is filed within time. It termed it “illogical” to argue that the authority could decide compensation on merits but not consider limitation, which “goes to the very root of the matter”.
The court emphasised that permitting NHSRCL to amend its reply does not mean the limitation plea is accepted, and the company remains free to contest it.
Dismissing both petitions, the High Court directed the LARR Authority in Nashik to decide the compensation reference expeditiously, preferably within six months.
Also Watch:
Project context
Of the total 508.17 kilometres of rail track between Mumbai and Ahmedabad, about 21 km is planned to be underground. One of the entry points to the underground tunnel falls on the land in Vikhroli (owned by Godrej).
Godrej and the government have been embroiled in a legal dispute over acquisition of the company-owned land in the Vikhroli area of Mumbai for the bullet train project since 2019.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
