Land acquired for bullet train project except for Godrej plot: State to HC

The state had alleged that the company was delaying the acquisition process for its vested interests and played the lion’s share in delaying the project.

Mumbai: The land acquisition for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train project in Maharashtra is completed, said the state government to the Bombay high court on Monday. However, the plot of land at Vikhroli is yet to be acquired from Godrej and Boyce.

The state government urged the court to expedite the hearing on the petition filed by the company challenging the ₹264 crore compensation. (HT PHOTO)

The state government, therefore, urged the court to expedite the hearing on the petition filed by the company challenging the ₹264 crore compensation. The court accepted the request and posted the petition for hearing on December 5. The HC said it would hear the petition on three consecutive days and expected all parties to conclude their arguments in that period.

The division bench of justice RD Dhanuka and justice SG Dige while hearing the petition was told by advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni that the petition filed by Godrej and Boyce was delaying the commencement of the project and hence hearing of the petition should be expedited.

Senior advocate Navroz Seervai for the company, however, said that there was a constitutional challenge and other issues involved in the litigation which needed to be addressed and hence the court would require some time to complete the hearing.

As the bench expressed the need to complete the hearing in a fixed time, Seervai said that it would take around 4-5 hours to complete his arguments. The court then fixed December 5 as the date for commencing the hearing and end it on December 7.

The company in its petition claimed that the procedure adopted by the state government for advertising the plot was illegal. It further claimed that the final compensation of ₹264 crores awarded to it was lesser than ₹572 crores, which was initially offered to it for its land, and hence urgent interim reliefs sought by it could not be denied on grounds of national interest.

The state had alleged that the company was delaying the acquisition process for its vested interests and played the lion’s share in delaying the project.