The petitioners had sought additional compensation claiming that they were compensated only for their agricultural land in two villages in Thane district, while land reserved for open spaces and internal roads was acquired by the state government “virtually free of cost”

Published on: Sep 8, 2026, 07:43:00 IST

Prefer HTon Google

Share via
Copy link

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court last week dismissed five petitions seeking additional compensation for land reserved for open spaces and roads which was acquired for the Mumbai-Nagpur Samruddhi Expressway in 2019-20.

“This court finds substance in the contention of the respondents (state government) that the present petitions have not been filed to air a genuine grievance of land owners/farmers and that the petitions have been orchestrated by individuals and entities involved in the business of land deals,” a division bench of justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat observed.

The petitioners had sought additional compensation claiming that they were compensated only for their agricultural land in two villages in Thane district, while land reserved for open spaces and internal roads was acquired by the state government “virtually free of cost”. But the division bench found substance in the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation’s (MSRDC) contention that in some instances, power of attorney (PoA) holders had vouched for facts that could only be known to the original land owners or farmers.

“The whole frame of the petitions is rendered suspicious due to such defective pleadings,” the judges said.

Agreements for land acquisition and compensation were executed between the land owners and the state government in August 2019 and August 2020, and the MSRDC had compensated the owners for their agricultural land under the Maharashtra Highways (MH) Act, 1955 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The court said that the petitioners had voluntarily entered into agreements with the state government and were aware that land earmarked for open spaces and internal roads was not included in the compensation package. “The petitioners cannot be permitted to wriggle out of the basis of determination and payment of compensation, as per the said agreements,” it noted.

The MSRDC told the court that the five petitions had not been filed by the original land owners, but by assignees or PoA holders, that too belatedly. “These persons had made it a business to get such documents executed from the original land owners and to agitate such issues belatedly,” it told the court.

In one of the petitions, a land owner from Lahe village was paid ₹87.91 lakh as compensation for 1,877 square metres of land acquired for the highway. However, in the petition filed in 2024, his PoA holder claimed that he had been compensated only for 410 square metres and not the rest of the land that included internal roads and open spaces. The court, however, found no substance in the arguments.

Catch every big hit, every wicket with Crickit, a one stop destination for Live Scores, Match Stats, Infographics & much more. Explore now!



Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.

See Less