A division bench of Justice AS Dave and Justice Biren Vaishnav called the petition, filed by over 1,000 people including farmers, "bereft of merit".
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday rejected nearly 60 petitions opposing land acquisition for the Mumbai-Ahmedabad Bullet Train corridor, giving a major boost to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's dream project. A division bench of Justice AS Dave and Justice Biren Vaishnav called the petition, filed by over 1,000 people including farmers, "bereft of merit".
The court, however, clarified that its judgment would have no bearing on the future issues on the adequacy of compensation to be paid to the affected persons. The court also asked the state government to ensure that "fair, adequate, and reasonable" compensation should be paid to them by following a transparent procedure.
Compensation to the affected persons should be on a par with the compensation paid for acquisition of similar kind of land in nearby areas by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), or any such central or state government authority, the HC told the state government.
The project affected persons had earlier cited several examples to press for their demand.
They said NHAI had paid considerably greater compensation for the acquired land than what is being offered by the state government for the mega project.
‘No Merit’
|
| While the petitioners argued that the amendments carried out by the state government were in contravention with the central act and defeats the latter’s purpose, the court did not find any merit in the same |
The bench accepted the 'indexation formula' adopted by the state to recompense the petitioners saying that the calculation cannot be termed "unfair, unjust and opaque procedure". It pointed out that merely because the government has not updated the jantri rates (circle rates) for ascertaining the market value of land post-2011, it does not mean that the compensation being offered is unfair.
The court said that the project affected persons always have the option of approaching the authorities for higher compensation citing relief provided under the National Highways Act, or Railways Act. It clarified that they also have an option to approach the high court with an appeal, if they are not happy with the decision of the authorities.
The division bench rejected the arguments of the petitioners questioning the constitutional validity of the amendments carried out in 2016 by the state government in central government's Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. While the petitioners argued that the amendments carried out by the state government were in contravention with the central act and defeats the latter's purpose, the court did not find any merit in the same.
The court also rejected the contentions raised by the farmers that social impact assessment was not carried out under the Land Acquisition Act. It also held that the state giving a go-bye to the mandatory provisions of SIA and rehabilitation and resettlement under the central Act was legal.
After the verdict was pronounced, advocate general Kamal Trivedi said it is a major victory for the government and would help in putting the project on a fast track.
What The Court Said
|
The bench accepted the ‘indexation formula’ adopted by the state to recompense the petitioners saying that the calculation cannot be termed ‘unfair and unjust
|
It said not updating jantri rates for ascertaining market value of land post-2011 does not mean that the compensation being offered is unfair
|
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Bullet train")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}