Bombay HC rejects govt plea to declare 193-acre Thane land as acquired private forest
The HC directed TMC to issue Transferable Development Right (TDR) or Development Rights Certificate (DRC) to compensate a private firm (the original land owner) within 21 days.
"We record that the TMC cannot take a somersault to deprive the company of the compensation in the form of DRC," the Bombay HC observed. (Express File Photo)
The Bombay High Court rejected Maharashtra government’s petition to declare nearly 193 acre land at Manpada-Chitalsar in Thane, as acquired private forest having status of deemed reserved forest under the Maharashtra Private Forests Acquisition (MPFA) Act.
The HC noted that presently around 104 acres of area is acquired, owned and possessed by Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) and on the actual site, it has constructed 40 metres DP road and municipal bus depot and reserved the land for developing garden, maternity home, park, school, metro rail and small portion (nearly 4 acres) for twin tunnel project, which is at advanced stage.
The TMC, through senior advocate Ram Apte, said that green cover would be maintained and portion of the land covered by greenery will be protected. The civic body added that it was willing to hand over said portion to the state government if it desired to maintain the same.
The HC directed TMC to issue Transferable Development Right (TDR) or Development Rights Certificate (DRC) to compensate a private firm (the original land owner) within 21 days.
A division bench of Justices Ravindra V Ghuge and Ashwin D Bhobe on February 20 passed a 373-page judgment on pleas by state government through the Chief Conservator of Forests & Director, Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP) and another plea by a private firm, the original owner of the land, called D Dahyabhai & Co. Pvt. Ltd.
The state government, through senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas, sought direction to quash and set aside June, 2017 order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) and sought direction that entire land in question be declared as being finally acquired private forest (from private owner) under MPFA.
On the other hand, the petitioner private firm, in its plea argued through advocate Chirag Balsara, sought direction to respondent authorities to issue TDR/DRC against compensation park reservation area of nearly 100 acres that was acquired by TMC.
Story continues below this ad
“TMC can’t deprive company in a DRC form”: HC
“We record that the TMC cannot take a somersault to deprive the company of the compensation in the form of DRC,” the Bombay HC observed.
The HC observed that the private firm, the original owner, had purchased the land from Court Receiver on July 6, 1960 through two conveyance deeds and later a notice was issued in August, 1975 under Indian Forest Act, signed by a Forest Guard, who was an “unauthorised” person.
The bench observed the said notice was addressed to “stranger” D Dahyabhai and Co and was never served on actual lawful owner D. Dahybhai and Co. Pvt. Ltd.
The court further noted the land always remained in the possession of the actual owner, for almost 6 decades and later TMC acquired it through 2019 deed, took physical possession and declared reservations for public purposes, public projects on some portions of the land.
Story continues below this ad
The state government claimed that while the land owner had sought inquiry under MPFA Act only in respect of 24 acres and 32 Gunthas of land, the MRT “illegally” expanded the scope of inquiry to 193 acres. The government claimed the MRT “erroneously” released 193 acres of Forest land from acquisition, therefore its 2017 order was required to be set aside.
The HC observed the MRT order deserved “no interference” as 1975 notice was issued by “incompetent” person and was addressed to a partnership firm which was not an owner of the land, therefore, state’s plea deserved to be dismissed.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
