SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.V.Gangapurwala, Vinay Joshi, JJ.
Radhika J. Bhalerao – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3683 of 2020
Decided On : 24-03-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Nikhil Mengade, Advocate, Dhaval Deshpande, Advocate, Rahul Lathi, Advocate, Yash Jariwala, Advocate, Pranay Dave, Advocate, Vijay Patil, Advocate, A.A.Kumbhakoni, Advocate, P.P.Kakade, Advocate, Akshay Shind, Advocate, R.M.Shinde, Advocate

The market value specified in the Stamp Act for registration of Sale Deed and/or Agreement of Sale in the area of the land situated must be considered for determining the compensation amount, and executive instructions cannot contravene statutory provisions or rules.

Headnote:

Compensation - Land Acquisition - Maharashtra Highway Act - Sec. 26, 19-B of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Maharashtra Stamps Act, 1958 - Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Bombay Stamp (Determination of True Market Value of property) Rules, 1995

Fact of the Case:

The Petitioner challenges a corrigendum that exempted the Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway Project from the circular dtd. 30/8/2019, which considered the ready reckoner as per the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 for determining the market value of the land.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the corrigendum deviated from the provisions of the statute and rules governing the principle for determination of compensation, and set it aside. The court also stated that the Petitioner has a remedy to assail the award before the appropriate forum in accordance with the law.

Issues: The issues involved the differentiation in determining compensation for different projects, the applicability of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and the validity of the corrigendum.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the market value specified in the Stamp Act for registration of Sale Deed and/or Agreement of Sale in the area of the land situated must be considered for determining the compensation amount. It also emphasized that executive instructions cannot contravene statutory provisions or rules.

Final Decision: The impugned corrigendum dtd. 11/9/2018 was set aside, and the rule was made absolute in the above terms.

JUDGMENT

S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. - Rule. Rule returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties.

    The Petitioner assails corrigendum dtd. 11/9/2018. Under the said corrigendum, the circular dtd. 30/8/2019 is not made applicable to the acquisition for the Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway Project.

    2. Under the Government Resolution dtd. 13/8/2018, the Government had taken a decision to consider the ready reckoner as per the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 for the purpose of determining the market value of the land. The said decision is sought to be escaped for the Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway Project.

    3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondents cannot differentiate between the projects while determining the compensation amount. Same would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Respondents cannot determine the quantum of compensation for projects applying different policies. According to the learned Counsel, the same also would not be in consonance with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

    4. The learned Advocate General for the State submits that guidelines are provided for determination of the ready reckoner rates under the Indian Stamps Act. Under the Notification dtd. 23/8/2014, Rules have been framed namely - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Rules, 2014 (the Rules 2014). The learned Advocate General submits that in case the award is pass13ed, the Petitioners have right to assail before the executive. Before the executive, the Petitioner can raise all the contentions. The learned Advocate General submits that circular need not be quashed. The learned Advocate General submits that 83% of acquisition is complete by private purchase and compensation paid. In view of that, impugned communication is issued.

    5. The acquisition made for Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway is under the provisions of the Maharashtra Highway Act. If the acquisition is under the Maharashtra Highway Act, then the provisions of Sec. 26 to 30 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 are applicable for determination of the compensation. Sec. 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation Act lays down the following criteria for determination of compensation. Ss. 26 reads as under:-

      "26:- Determination of market value of land by Collector:- (1) The Collector shall adopt the following criteria in assessing and determining the market value of the land, namely-

        (a) the market value, if any, specified in the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899) for the registration of sale deeds or agreements to sell, as the case may be, in the area, where the land is situated; or

          (b) the average sale price for similar type o land situated in the nearest village or nearest vicinity area; or

            (c) consented amount of compensation as agreed upon under sub-sec. (2) of sec. 2 in case of acquisition of lands for private companies or for public private partnership projects, whichever is higher.

              Provided that the date for determination of market value shall be the date on which the notification has been issued under sec. 11.

              6. Sec. 19-B of the Maharashtra Highway Act, provides for the determination of the amount payable as compensation. Proviso to Sub-Sec. 3 of Sec. 19-B of the Act provides that the State Government while issuing the general order under the preceding proviso shall adhere to the provision of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, relating to determination of the amount of compensation in accordance with the First Schedule and rehabilitation and resettlement specified in the Second and Third Schedules.

              7. Sec. 26(1) (a) of the Act of 2013 provides the mechanism for determination of the market value, inter alia, the quantum of compensation payable upon acquisition of

              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
              1
              2
              3
              4
              5
              6
              7
              8
              9
              10
              11
              SupremeToday Portrait Ad
              supreme today icon
              logo-black

              An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

              Please visit our Training & Support
              Center or Contact Us for assistance

              qr

              Scan Me!

              India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

              For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

              whatsapp-icon Back to top