Case Note & Summary
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai filed a writ petition challenging the award dated 3rd November 2017 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, which determined compensation of Rs.31,93,26,175 for a land admeasuring 4711 sq.meters situated at Malad, Bombay. The land was reserved for Recreational Ground under the Development Plan prepared by the Municipal Corporation. A proposal for acquisition was sent to the Collector on 3rd August 2013, and a notification under Section 6 read with Section 126 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 was issued on 7th September 2013. The joint measurement of the property was conducted and it was found that the plot admeasures 4711.40 sq.meters. The Sub-Divisional Officer, after considering the Ready Reckoner rates and other materials, awarded the compensation. The Municipal Corporation contended that the compensation was excessive and not based on proper application of the Ready Reckoner rates. The respondent, M/s. B.J. Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd., supported the award. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the award was based on the Ready Reckoner rates and the petitioner failed to show any error of law or perversity. The court further held that writ jurisdiction is not an appellate forum and the court cannot re-appreciate evidence unless the award is perverse or based on no evidence. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Compensation Determination - Ready Reckoner Rates - The court considered whether the Sub-Divisional Officer's award of Rs.31,93,26,175 for 4711 sq.meters land was excessive. The court held that the award was based on the Ready Reckoner rates and the petitioner failed to show any error of law or perversity. (Paras 1-14) B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope of Judicial Review - Compensation Award - The court examined the scope of interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. It held that writ jurisdiction is not an appellate forum and the court cannot re-appreciate evidence unless the award is perverse or based on no evidence. (Paras 2-14) C) Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 - Sections 6 and 126 - Land Acquisition for Public Purpose - The court noted that the land was reserved for Recreational Ground and the acquisition was initiated under the Act. The compensation was determined by the Sub-Divisional Officer as per the statutory scheme. (Paras 1-14)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the compensation awarded by the Sub-Divisional Officer under Section 6 read with Section 126 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 for land reserved for Recreational Ground is excessive and warrants interference in writ jurisdiction.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the writ petition with no order as to costs, upholding the award of compensation.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition
- Compensation Determination
- Ready Reckoner Rates
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act
- 1966
- Section 6
- Section 126
- Writ Jurisdiction
- Scope of Judicial Review
