'Land Cannot Be Allotted To PAPs Before Lawful Acquisition, Compensation To Original Owner': Bombay HC

'Land Cannot Be Allotted To PAPs Before Lawful Acquisition, Compensation To Original Owner': Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court ruled that land cannot be allotted to project-affected persons before it is lawfully acquired and the original owner is compensated. It declared the acquisition of a Pune land parcel as lapsed, quashed the PAP allotment and directed the State to provide alternative rehabilitation land.

Urvi MahajaniUpdated: Sunday, July 26, 2026, 02:08 AM IST
'Land Cannot Be Allotted To PAPs Before Lawful Acquisition, Compensation To Original Owner': Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court declared the acquisition of a Pune land parcel as lapsed and quashed its allotment to project-affected persons | AI Generated Representational Image

Mumbai, July 25, 2026: Holding that the government cannot allot land to project-affected persons (PAPs) before lawfully acquiring it and compensating the original owner, the Bombay High Court has declared the acquisition of a Pune land parcel as lapsed.

The court found that the authorities neither took possession of the land nor paid compensation, yet proceeded to allot part of it to another family under the rehabilitation scheme.

Calling the allotment legally unsustainable, the court quashed the allotment orders while directing the State to provide alternative land to the project-affected family in accordance with law.

Acquisition Declared Lapsed

A bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat held that the acquisition of 1.61 hectares from Gat No. 1420 at Sikrapur village in Shirur taluka had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The court was hearing two connected petitions. One was filed by landowner Namdev Khedkar seeking a declaration that the acquisition had lapsed, while the other was filed by Laxman Wadekar's family, who had been allotted part of the land as project-affected persons displaced by the Chaskaman Irrigation Project.

State Failed To Prove Possession

The bench found that official records consistently showed that the land was not in the irrigation project's beneficial zone and that government officers had recommended its exclusion from acquisition.

The court also noted that the State failed to produce reliable evidence to prove it had taken possession of the land. “No panchanama or possession receipt was placed on record, at any point in time, for demonstrating that possession of the subject land was taken,” the bench observed.

It further found that the authorities could not establish that compensation had been paid or even offered to the landowner. The judges said the State had “miserably failed” to show that a notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act had been served.

Also Watch:

Fresh Allotment Ordered

Consequently, the court quashed the 2019, 2020, and 2022 orders allotting part of the disputed land to the Wadekar family.

However, the bench directed the State government to reconsider the family's claim for rehabilitation land and pass a fresh allotment order within eight weeks. It clarified that any fresh allotment must exclude the land in Gat No. 1420, whose acquisition has now been declared to have lapsed.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/