State must demarcate land left out of IIT-B acquisition: HC

A division bench of justices A S Gadkari and Kamal Khata observed that the state government had “shown little inclination to mend its ways” despite the court previously passing an order in a similar matter

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has criticised the Maharashtra government for its “obdurate stand” against demarcating land in Powai that was not included in a land acquisition award for the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT-B) in 1962.

Mumbai, India - September -26, 2026: Following the student Sahil Wadoke suicide case at IIT Bombay, the atmosphere around the IIT Bombay campus remained tense for several days, with a heavy police presence deployed in the area. However, on Saturday, the situation appeared calm and peaceful, with significantly fewer police personnel seen around the campus and no media personnel visible at the site. ,in Mumbai ,in Mumbai, India, on, Saturday, September -26, 2026. ( photo by Praful Gangurde / Hindustan Times ) (Praful Gangurde)

A division bench of justices A S Gadkari and Kamal Khata observed that the state government had “shown little inclination to mend its ways” despite the court previously passing an order in a similar matter. It directed the state government to survey the land and update property records in the name of the respective owners, who have been in possession of the land for over 80 years.

“Only the state would know what it acquired and what it did not. It was therefore the state’s fair and lawful duty to carve out the balance lands, to identify and demarcate those acquired and those not acquired, and to record the same in all the revenue records in the names of the respective parties, and to inform the petitioners accordingly. It could not have been the other way round,” the court said.

While the trusts did not claim any of that land, they urged the court to direct the state to survey and demarcate the land that was not covered under the acquisition award. They came to the court over the ownership of 19 acres and 32 gunthas in Paspoli and 58 acres, 9 gunthas and 9 annas in Tirandaz. They said the land in the two villages had been allotted to the family trusts under an indenture executed in 1938.

Ruling in favour of the petitioners, the bench said, “In our view, the state was obliged to identify and demarcate the lands that would continue to belong to the petitioners after the acquisition. The petitioners could not have demarcated the lands according to their own understanding or whims and fancies.”

The court also said that it had passed an order in a similar matter on September 22, but the state continued to act like a private litigant instead of a public authority. “Such an approach is not merely impermissible but wholly unacceptable,” it said.

The state government told the court that the petitioners’ names had already been entered in the 7/12 extracts, the government’s record of land ownership and cultivation details. The court, however, said this was “clearly insufficient”.

The court also criticised the state government’s approach, saying it flew in the face of its claims of respecting the judiciary. This “only displays the state’s scant respect for, and recalcitrance towards the judiciary. The usual assertion that the state has utmost respect for the judiciary is clearly belied by such conduct,” the judges said.

Portal for land records

The bench also asked the state to create a portal on which the status of a plot of land is accessible to all concerned government authorities. The portal should include information on land acquisitions, perpetual leases granted over state lands, and judgments passed in favour or against it, the court said.