The Bombay High Court has halted a government resolution that sought to reclaim land from the Kandivali Co-op Industrial Estate Ltd, which had been allocated 22 years ago. Challenging the government's October 8 decision, the estate argued it was arbitrary and lacked justification. Senior counsel Aspi Chinoy emphasised that the government could not revoke the December 2002 allocation without a fair hearing. The court's intervention came after the collector began the reclamation process, highlighting the need for procedural fairness and the protection of community rights amid concerns of land misuse.
The Bombay High Court has intervened, putting a halt to a recent government resolution (GR) that permitted the state to reclaim land allocated to an industrial estate in Kandivali over two decades ago. The Kandivali Co-op Industrial Estate Ltd had appealed to the High Court, challenging the government's decision issued on October 8, arguing that it lacked substantial justification and was made arbitrarily.
During the proceedings, senior counsel Aspi Chinoy, representing the estate, informed Justices A. S. Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil that the government had cancelled the allocation of 116 acres to the society and was seeking to recover half of the unearned increment from the estate. Chinoy contended that the state could not revoke the December 2002 GR regarding the land allocation without providing a fair hearing to the society, which had been operating its industrial units on the premises for years.
According to a report by TOI, the situation escalated when the collector initiated the process to reclaim the land on October 10. In response to this rapid action, the High Court issued a notice to the government, highlighting that the society's members had been actively conducting business and that the attempt to take back the land was initiated without prior notice. The court's decision to stay the government resolution was based on the observation that the takeover was not only abrupt but also unaccompanied by any consultation or hearing for the affected parties.
The government had justified its resolution by citing numerous complaints regarding the alleged misuse of the land, which prompted the decision for reclamation. However, the court's ruling underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the need for authorities to engage with stakeholders before making significant decisions that affect their rights and operations. As the case unfolds, it raises broader questions about land use policies and the balance between government authority and community rights in industrial development zones.
In conclusion, the Bombay High Court's stay on the government's land reclamation effort underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding procedural fairness and the rights of communities. By demanding a fair hearing before such significant decisions are made, the court reinforces the principle that governmental authority must be balanced with stakeholder engagement. As the situation evolves, it brings to light critical discussions on land use policies and the dynamics between state power and community interests in industrial areas, advocating for a more collaborative approach to governance that prioritises transparency and accountability.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
