HC refuses to order BMC to acquire reserved land owned by production house

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court recently dismissed a petition filed by Mahal Pictures Private Limited, owners of the famous Kamalistan Studio, seeking orders to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to acquire 9,540-sq-mtr of land owned by the production house that was established by late filmmaker Kamal Amrohi of movies like Mahal, Pakeezah and Razia Sultan fame. The land in question has been reserved by the BMC for “social amenity” as it falls in the vicinity of Mahakali Caves, declared as a protected monument under the Ancient Monument Preservation Act, 1909.
The dismissal of the petition came after the BMC in clear terms informed the court that it has its own priorities which lean in favour of basic requirements like infrastructure, hospitals, schools, playgrounds, etc. The civic body, however, did not rule out acquisition of the land in future and said, if that happens, the landowners may get DCR or TDR.
As the large tract of land cannot be put to any commercial use after being declared as ‘reserved’, the production house had petitioned before the court that since it was the civic body that had issued the declaration, they should acquire the land and offer them land acquisition compensation or DRC (Development Rights Certificate) or TDR (Transferrable Development Right). On August 2, 2019, the civic body had rejected the production house’s plea for the same, claiming that it was not the appropriate authority to grant such DRC or TDR, as the said land is in the vicinity of Mahakali caves, also known as Kodivite Caves, which is a protected monument.
Thereafter, Mahal Pictures challenged the rejection by the BMC in court. As the BMC maintained in court that at this stage it was not desirous of acquiring the plot, the division bench of justice Bharati Dangre and justice Manjusha Deshpande dismissed the petition filed by the production house, observing that it cannot force the civic body to acquire the land. “The government cannot be compelled to acquire the land, as taking up a project will lie with the executive and we do not think that any writ of mandamus can be issued directing the corporation to acquire the said land,” it said.
The court also observed, “The petitioner has purchased the land and has become (its) owner in the year 1957, he was and is aware about the reservation on the said plot of land, and since he has purchased it with open eyes, he cannot now argue that it is onerous for him to maintain the land and persist with his insistence to acquire the same”.
Mahal Pictures, however, contended that the BMC did not indicate as to who is the appropriate authority and claimed that the civic body was liable to compensate the landowners in term of DRC or TDR, as it is the authority which has imposed the reservation on their land and, thus, deprived them from utilising the same.
The argument, however, failed to impress upon the high court, which rejected the petition. The judges said they were conscious of the predicament of the landowners who are restricted from putting the land to any use in a commercial sense but said the grant of DCR or TDR is in lieu of acquisition, and the civic body cannot be compelled to acquire the land.