In a landmark decision, the Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) to compensate a petitioner for the acquisition of his property, which took place 36 years ago without any payment. The case, Writ Petition No. 700 of 2003, was filed by Yusuf Yunus Kantharia, who owned a plot of land measuring 979 square meters in Dharavi, Mumbai. The land, along with a chawl known as Kantharia Chawl, was acquired by MHADA in 1988 under Section 93(5) of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (MHADA Act).
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issue in this case was the non-payment of compensation for the compulsory acquisition of the petitioner’s property. Despite the acquisition taking place in 1988, the petitioner had not received any compensation, which he argued was a violation of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Indian Constitution. These articles protect the right to equality, the right to life and personal liberty, and the right to property, respectively.
Court’s Decision
The Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Kamal Khata delivered the judgment on August 1, 2024. The court found the delay in compensating the petitioner to be “callous and insensitive,” amounting to a “virtual expropriation” of the petitioner’s property without the authority of law.
Key Observations
The court made several important observations:
– Violation of Constitutional Rights: The court noted that the delay in payment violated the petitioner’s constitutional and human rights. “Such conduct on the Respondent’s part amounts to virtual expropriation of a citizen’s property without the authority of law and without paying any compensation,” the court stated.
– Failure to Trace Records: The court was critical of MHADA’s failure to trace the original acquisition records, which had been misplaced. “An expropriated owner cannot be defeated of his right of compensation because of the deficiencies in the functioning in the office of Special Land Acquisition Officer,” the court observed.
– Interim Compensation: The court directed MHADA to pay an interim compensation of Rs. 25,00,000 to the petitioner within 15 days. Additionally, MHADA was ordered to pay Rs. 5,00,000 for violating the petitioner’s constitutional and human rights and Rs. 1,00,000 towards litigation costs.
Quotes from the Judgment
– “Such conduct on the Respondent’s part amounts to virtual expropriation of a citizen’s property without the authority of law and without paying any compensation.”
– “The right to receive compensation towards the compulsory acquisition of the Petitionerโs property cannot be defeated based on the insensitive excuse about misplaced case papers.”
Also Read
Parties and Legal Representation
– Petitioner: Yusuf Yunus Kantharia
– Respondents: Bombay Housing and Area Development Authority, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority, Special Land Acquisition Officer, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Board, State of Maharashtra
– Bench: Justices M.S. Sonak and Kamal Khata
– Lawyers for Petitioner: Mr. Omprakash Pandey, Mr. Rahul Pandey, Ms. Pramila Pandey, Mr. Alok Singh, i/b Pandey & Co.
– Lawyers for Respondents: Mr. Nishigandh Patil, AGP; Mr. P.G. Lad, Ms. Sayli Apte, Ms. Shreya Shah
