Bullet Train Project: Bombay High Court reserves verdict in plea by Godrej & Boyce; directs parties to maintain status quo

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict in a petition filed by Godrej & Boyce challenging acquisition of its land for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High-Speed Rail Project..Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, appearing for the National High-Speed Rail Corporation Limited (NHSRCL), asked the Court that the land which was still in Godrej’s possession may be handed over to carry out measurements.A Division Bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and MM Sathaye, however, asked the NHSRCL to hold off for some more time, as they had already waited this long. .Former Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, appearing for the State acquisition authority, pointed out that Section 38 of the Land Acquisition Act stipulated that after an acquisition award is passed, possession has to be handed over to the relevant authorities within three months. In the present case, this three-month period had expired while the petition was being argued. However, the authorities had put off taking action, considering the fact that the petition was pending.Kumbhakoni and Singh raised apprehensions that the company may use this as an argument against the authorities to say that no attempt was made by the authorities to take possession of the land. Appearing for Godrej-Boyce Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai assured the Court that no such argument would be advanced. Accordingly, the petition was reserved. .Singh had argued on Monday that NHSRCL had completed 100% acquisition of land in Gujarat and commenced work for the bullet train project, while in Maharashtra, they had completed acquisition of only 97% of land. He stated that it was lands owned by parties like Godrej & Boyce that were pending for acquisition..[Bullet Train project] Acquisition complete except for Godrej & Boyce land: Maharashtra to Bombay High Court.The ASG argued that the present petition was only causing delay to a project of public and national importance, and that such delay could possibly lead to escalation in the costs of the project. He also contended that Godrej & Boyce could not at this stage say that the company land could not be acquired.“First you say acquire. We identify the land. We realign our project. And then you say the land cannot be acquired. The compensation is a different issue. But you cannot come now say that the land cannot be acquired”, he contended. .He also said that if compensation was a concern, then higher compensation could be considered and then granted.“There is no structure on the land, no activity on the land. Money is deposited before authority (land acquisition authority). Over and above the award amount, they will get interest of ₹38 crore. If Court decides to increase compensation, it will be given, but project should not suffer,” he concluded..The State government earlier sought for the dismissal of the petition, stating that there was no violation of the fundamental rights of Godrej & Boyce.