Bombay HC: Land Allotment to PAPs Requires Lawful Acquisition

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the government cannot allot land to project-affected persons (PAPs) before lawfully acquiring it and compensating the original owner.

In a recent judgment, the court declared the acquisition of a 1.61-hectare land parcel in Pune as lapsed. The land, located in Gat No. 1420 at Sikrapur village in Shirur taluka, was acquired for the Chaskaman Irrigation Project.

The court found that the authorities had neither taken possession of the land nor paid compensation to the original owner, yet proceeded to allot part of it to another family under the rehabilitation scheme.

The bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat held that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The court was hearing two connected petitions, one filed by landowner Namdev Khedkar seeking a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed, and the other filed by Laxman Wadekar's family, who had been allotted part of the land as project-affected persons.

The bench found that official records consistently showed that the land was not in the irrigation project's beneficial zone and that government officers had recommended its exclusion from acquisition.

The court also noted that the State failed to produce reliable evidence to prove it had taken possession of the land, and that no panchanama or possession receipt was placed on record.

The judges further found that the authorities could not establish that compensation had been paid or even offered to the landowner, and that the State had “miserably failed” to show that a notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act had been served.

Consequently, the court quashed the 2019, 2020, and 2022 orders allotting part of the disputed land to the Wadekar family.

However, the bench directed the State government to reconsider the family's claim for rehabilitation land and pass a fresh allotment order within eight weeks, excluding the land in Gat No. 1420 whose acquisition has now been declared to have lapsed.

This judgment highlights the importance of following the due process of law in land acquisition and rehabilitation, and ensures that the rights of both the original landowners and the project-affected persons are protected.

The court's decision is a significant step towards promoting transparency and fairness in land acquisition, and will have implications for similar cases in the future.