HC dismisses Godrej plea on land for bullet train

The division bench of justice RD Dhanuka and justice MM Sathaye prevented the company to approach the high court again and question about the land acquisition.

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Thursday dismissed a petition filed by Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd, which challenged the acquisition of 39,570 square metres of their land in Vikhroli for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train project.

The court also took into consideration the fact that the high-speed rail corridor is a project of national importance, around 97% of the land required for the project is acquired and around ₹32,000 crore has already been spent on the project. (Getty Images)

The division bench of justice RD Dhanuka and justice MM Sathaye prevented the company to approach the high court again and question about the land acquisition.

The bench said in the first round of litigation in 2018, the company had approached the high court after a notification was published in March 2018 for the acquisition of its land, with a request to the National High-Speed Rail Corporation Ltd (NHSRCL) to accept an alternate piece of land for construction of a ventilation shaft, distribution and traction substations for the project.

The plot was, however, found to be unsuitable and the company offered a second alternate plot which was accepted by the NHSRCL. The court said at that time what remained was the determination of the amount of compensation and the manner of payment - in view of the pending dispute over the title of the Vikhroli land between Godrej and the state government.

The court said the negotiations failed on account of the title dispute (the state government claimed that it was the owner of the land), but the acquisition of the second alternate plot ceased to be a dispute. “Since various steps were taken by the NHSRCL and the state government in pursuance of the alternate proposal offered by Godrej and the parties having taken steps in pursuant to the said offer of the alternate plot by the petitioner, Godrej and Boyce are prevented from challenging the acquisition of plot,” said the court.

“The (second) petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground itself,” said the bench, but examined the Godrej petition on merits as well and found it untenable.

The court refused to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction, noting that no procedural irregularities were brought to its notice. Besides, the court also took into consideration the fact that the high-speed rail corridor is a project of national importance, around 97% of the land required for the project is acquired and around ₹32,000 crore has already been spent on the project.

The bench also took note of the fact that tenders for all the civil works in the Maharashtra corridor have already been floated and in Gujarat, all civil works contracts are already awarded and foundation work for a 194-kilometre rail corridor, 9.5-kilometre viaduct and 23-kilometre girder casting are complete.

“At such a stage of the project, this court cannot interfere with the acquisition of the property which is for a small portion of the land as compared to 97% of the land already acquired and various activities already having been carried out substantially,” said the bench.

“The Government has already spent a huge amount on completing the activities so far and any interference in the acquisition of the property at this stage would be totally against the public interest,” it added.

HC also rejected the challenge to the notifications issued by the state government granting two 12-month extensions to complete the acquisition process, contending that under the first proviso (a clause which is added to the statute to accept something from enacting clause or to limit its applicability) to section 25 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, an extension can be granted only once.

“A perusal of the first proviso to section 25 indicates that there is no cap in the outer limit on granting extension for a particular period,” the bench said while rejecting the contention.

HC also rejected the company’s grievance regarding the compensation awarded on September 15, 2022. The court said, “The award cannot be considered as perverse and absurd” on the ground that at the time of private negotiations, an amount of ₹572.92 crore was offered to the company, but the compensation amount was reduced to less than half of that – to ₹264.27 crore as an award.

In any case, the court said, the company can take appropriate steps for enhancement of the compensation, if it was aggrieved by the compensation awarded.

Box

As per the government, the high-speed rail will cover the distance of 508.17 kilometres between Mumbai and Ahmedabad in 1 hour 58 minutes as against the 6 hours 35 minutes presently required for conventional trains. At present trains take around six-and-half-hours to cover the distance. The high-speed rail corridor will comprise tracks of 348.03 km in Gujarat, 4.5 km in the Union Territory of Dadra & Nagar Haveli, and 155.64 km in Maharashtra.

A 21-km stretch of rail line between the Bandra Kurla Complex and Thane will be an underground single-tube twin-track tunnel, out of which a stretch of 7 kms will be an undersea tunnel located below Thane creek. The rest of the railway line, estimated to cost around ₹1.08 lakh crore, will be an elevated corridor – to ensure no obstruction to the natural flow of waters, traffic and movement beneath.

Apart from greatly improving safety and security perception against external interference, elevated corridors would also reduce the land requirement for the corridor – a width of 17.5m against 36 m required for conventional railway tracks.