The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed two petitions challenging the alignment of Mumbai Metro Line 4 (ML4) observing that “under the garb of protecting and enforcing private rights of their properties, they (petitioners) have made attempts to stall and delay public project of immense importance”. The court has clarified that the petitioners shall be entitled to lawful compensation.
The ML4 is a 32.32km elevated corridor with 30 stations connecting Wadala and Kasarvadavali in Thane. A bench of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne dismissed petitions filed by Indo Nippon Chemical Co Ltd and Shree Yashwant co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Indo Nippon owns 7332.5 sqm of land in Ghatkopar and claims that the alignment affects 2,205 sqm of land, which is 27% of its plot.
MMRDA entered into agreement with DMRC to modify Mumbai metro rail master plan
The petitioners urged the HC to stay the order which the judges refused saying, “We have not passed any order granting stay. Moreover, the work is of public nature.” In May 2004, the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) prepared the Mumbai Metro Rail Master Plan with nine proposed corridors including ML4, whose alignment was alongside Eastern Express Highway.
Later, MMRDA entered into an agreement with Delhi Metro Railway Corporation (DMRC) to modify the plan and prepare a detailed project report (DPR) for all lines. A new DPR was prepared which was approved by MMRDA on June 30, 2016.
Indo-Nippon raised objection on Jan, 2018
Despite the public notice in Jan 2017, Indo Nippon did not participate. Centre issued a notification on March 23, 2017, approving and adding alignment of ML4 project. Subsequently, on Jan 16, 2018, Indo-Nippon raised its objection. The petitioners approached the HC and their advocate MM Vashi argued that the realignment and the land acquisition proceedings were in gross violation of the provisions of Metro Act 1978.
Advocate General Birendra Saraf submitted that all the “statutory provisions have been followed to the hilt”. Terming the petitions “devoid of merits”, the HC said it did not find any error in the action of MMRDA and State Government in the entire process.
