"Bullet Train Project of national importance": Bombay High Court rejects plea by Godrej & Boyce challenging land acquisition

The Bombay High Court Thursday rejected a petition filed by Godrej & Boyce challenging acquisition of its land for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad Bullet Train Project. [Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co Ltd v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.].A division bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and MM Sathaye said that the project is of national importance and no illegality has been found in the land acquisition proceedings."In our view, the powers of the Court under writ jurisdiction are discretionary and merely because there are certain alleged irregularities in the procedure required to be followed while acquiring the writ property. The court cannot exercise discretionary power in view of the fact that the bullet train project being infrastructural and public project of national importance," the Court said.The Court further said that the larger public interest would prevail over private interest and the project is first of its kind. "It is the paramount collective interest which would ultimately prevail. In the facts of this case, the private interest claimed by the petitioner does notprevail over the public interest which would subserve Infrastructural Project of public importance which is a dream project of this country and first of its kind", the order said.Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, appearing for Godrej & Boyce, sought status quo so that the company could file an appeal before the Supreme Court. However, the High Court refused to grant the same..The plea by Godrej and Boyce challenged an award of compensation passed on September 15, 2022 by the Deputy Collector for acquiring the company's land after awarding compensation of ₹264 crores.The application by the company claimed that the entire proceedings initiated in 2019 for land acquisition had lapsed in 2020 and, hence, the award passed by the officer was void ab initio.The plea also challenged the amendment to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act after which the bullet train project had been exempted from social impact assessment carried out by experts.Seervai, appearing for Godrej & Boyce, had contended during the hearing of the case that there were "multiple and patent illegalities" in the acquisition.Seervai had prayed for a stay on the proceedings arguing that national interest cannot be cited as ground to deny urgent interim reliefs..On the other hand, former Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, on behalf of the State acquisition authority, had told the Bombay High Court that the land acquisition for the project was complete except for the land owned by Godrej & Boyce company.He had also argued that there was no violation of fundamental rights of Godrej & Boyce, and hence the writ petition challenging the acquisition of land ought to be dismissed.He had apprised the Court about a suit filed by the State claiming title over the land, which Godrej & Boyce disputed.Despite the suit, the State offered to pay compensation, he had said, clarifying that if the title of the land goes in the State's favour, it would seek a return of the compensation paid. .Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh had argued that acquisition of land in Gujarat was already complete and work had also commenced, while in Maharashtra, they had completed acquisition of only 97% of land.He had highlighted that it was lands owned by parties like Godrej & Boyce that were pending for acquisition.He had also submitted that Godrej's 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. Singh has said that if compensation was a concern, then higher compensation could be considered and then granted, but the project ought not suffer any further..[Read Judgment]