The Government Resolution (GR) issued by the Urban Development Department on September 29, 2026, provides for the release of ₹240 crore under the stamp duty surcharge head.

However, the amount that will actually be distributed as net stamp duty grant to municipal corporations is ₹214.91 crore after deductions of ₹23.53 crore towards EESL dues and ₹1.56 crore towards UIDF-related interest.

The order is linked to the 1% surcharge imposed on stamp duty in respect of certain transactions involving immovable property in municipal corporation areas.

KEY NUMBERS

₹240 crore — Total sanctioned allocation for 2026-27
₹23.53 crore — EESL-related deduction
₹1.56 crore — UIDF interest deduction
₹214.91 crore — Net amount to be distributed after deductions
28 — Municipal corporations covered by the distribution
₹75.12 crore — Largest net allocation, to Pune Municipal Corporation

Why Is This 1% Stamp Duty Surcharge Being Distributed?

The Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act was amended to provide for an additional 1% surcharge on stamp duty in relation to specified instruments concerning immovable property situated within cities.

The surcharge applies to instruments relating to sale or gift of immovable property based on the value of the property, and to usufructuary mortgages based on the amount secured through the instrument.

The revenue generated through this surcharge is intended to be provided to municipal corporations.

For 2026-27, the Urban Development Department has now sanctioned ₹240 crore for distribution under this mechanism.

But ₹240 Crore Is Not the Net Civic Allocation

One of the most important aspects of the GR is the distinction between the sanctioned amount and the amount that municipal corporations will actually receive after adjustments.

The government has sanctioned a total of:

₹240,00,00,000

From this:

• ₹23,53,15,441 is earmarked for payment of outstanding EESL dues relating to LED street-lighting work.
• ₹1,56,28,939 is deducted towards interest payable under the UIDF scheme.
• ₹214,90,55,620 remains for distribution to the concerned municipal corporations as the net stamp duty grant.

The ₹240-crore calculation

EESL Dues Account for ₹23.53 Crore

A substantial portion of the allocation is being adjusted against pending payments to EESL.

The Urban Development Department states that information regarding amounts payable up to November 2025 for LED street-lighting work undertaken by EESL was received in respect of 14 municipal corporations.

The government has accordingly directed that ₹23.53 crore be transferred to the Commissioner-cum-Directorate of Municipal Administration for payment to EESL.

The EESL-related deductions are reflected corporation-wise in the government order.

This means the stamp duty surcharge allocation is not simply a fresh cash transfer to every municipal corporation. In several cases, the government is using part of the amount otherwise payable to the civic body to settle outstanding obligations.

WHAT THIS MEANS

The ₹240 crore is the sanctioned gross allocation.

₹214.91 crore is the net amount approved for distribution after the specified deductions.

Another ₹1.56 Crore Goes Towards UIDF Interest

The second adjustment relates to the Urban Infrastructure Development Fund, or UIDF.

The government states that municipal corporations that have received loans from the National Housing Bank under UIDF were required to pay interest for the April-June 2026 period.

For the municipal corporations listed in the GR, ₹1,56,28,939 is being deducted from their stamp duty grant towards this interest liability.

The amount is to be credited under the specified government receipt head.

This creates another important feature of the distribution: the stamp duty grant is also being used as a mechanism for adjusting certain outstanding municipal obligations to the government.

Pune Gets the Largest Net Allocation

Pune Municipal Corporation emerges as the largest beneficiary under the 2026-27 distribution.

Pune’s gross entitlement is approximately ₹76.05 crore.

After an EESL deduction of approximately ₹93.92 lakh, the corporation is approved to receive a net ₹75.12 crore.

The size of Pune’s allocation is substantially higher than that of the other municipal corporations listed in the order.

Thane is the second-largest recipient, with a net allocation of approximately ₹27.07 crore, while Pimpri-Chinchwad is approved for approximately ₹22.04 crore after an EESL deduction of about ₹9.37 crore.

Corporation-wise Distribution

Six Municipal Corporations Receive No Net Amount

The corporation-wise table also throws up an important point: several municipal corporations have their entire gross entitlement absorbed by deductions.

Based on the figures in the GR, Chandrapur, Amravati, Akola, Jalgaon, Kolhapur, Solapur, Bhiwandi-Nizampur, Jalna and Ichalkaranji have no net amount shown for distribution after the specified deductions.

In some cases, the entire allocation is deducted towards EESL dues.

In Solapur’s case, for example, the gross entitlement is approximately ₹2.13 crore, while ₹1.49 lakh is deducted towards UIDF interest and approximately ₹1.98 crore towards EESL, leaving no net distribution.

The same principle applies to several other corporations where the EESL deduction is equal to, or effectively consumes, the gross entitlement.

This is an important distinction from simply saying that all 28 corporations are receiving fresh funds.

Mumbai Region Gets a Significant Share

The distribution also has a significant concentration among municipal corporations in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region.

The major MMR allocations include:

• Thane: ₹27.07 crore
• Pimpri-Chinchwad: ₹22.04 crore
• Navi Mumbai: ₹12.90 crore
• Kalyan-Dombivli: ₹11.47 crore
• Vasai-Virar: ₹11.74 crore
• Panvel: ₹9.23 crore
• Mira-Bhayandar: ₹9.81 crore

The order therefore directs a substantial amount of the net distribution towards some of the largest urban local bodies in and around the Mumbai region.

Pune Alone Accounts for More Than One-Third of Net Distribution

Pune’s net allocation of approximately ₹75.12 crore represents roughly 35% of the ₹214.91 crore net amount available after deductions.

That makes Pune’s allocation considerably larger than the other individual municipal corporations.

The next largest net allocations are:

1. Pune — approximately ₹75.12 crore
2. Thane — approximately ₹27.07 crore
3. Pimpri-Chinchwad — approximately ₹22.04 crore
4. Navi Mumbai — approximately ₹12.90 crore
5. Vasai-Virar — approximately ₹11.74 crore
6. Kalyan-Dombivli — approximately ₹11.47 crore
7. Nagpur — approximately ₹10.13 crore
8. Mira-Bhayandar — approximately ₹9.81 crore
9. Panvel — approximately ₹9.23 crore
10. Nashik — approximately ₹14.32 crore

The ordering above is based on the net amounts stated in the GR; the government order itself does not provide a ranking.

Why the Stamp Duty Surcharge Matters to Cities

Stamp duty is directly linked to transactions involving immovable property. Consequently, the revenue generated through the surcharge provides a mechanism for transferring a portion of property-transaction-related revenue towards urban local bodies.

The present GR is therefore significant not merely because ₹240 crore has been sanctioned, but because it demonstrates how the government is allocating the proceeds of the 1% surcharge while simultaneously adjusting specific municipal liabilities.

The order also makes clear that the distribution is unconditional in nature, subject to the government instructions and accounting adjustments specified in the GR.

The Bigger Picture: Gross Allocation Versus Actual Cash Flow

The most important way to read this GR is through three different numbers:

₹240 crore — sanctioned allocation

This is the total amount approved under the 2026-27 budgetary provision for the 1% stamp duty surcharge.

₹25.09 crore — combined deductions

This consists of:

• ₹23.53 crore towards EESL dues
• ₹1.56 crore towards UIDF interest

₹214.91 crore — net distribution

This is the amount remaining for distribution after the specified deductions.

THE REAL TAKEAWAY

₹240 crore sanctioned ≠ ₹240 crore reaching municipal corporations as unrestricted net distribution.

The GR provides for ₹214.91 crore to be distributed after adjustments, while ₹25.09 crore is directed towards EESL and UIDF-related liabilities.

What This Means for Municipal Corporations

For municipal corporations receiving substantial net allocations, the funds provide an additional revenue stream tied to the state’s 1% stamp duty surcharge mechanism.

However, the corporation-wise table shows that the benefit is not uniform.

Some corporations receive substantial net amounts, while others have their entire gross entitlement adjusted against specified liabilities.

This means the headline ₹240 crore figure needs to be read alongside the corporation-wise deductions before assessing the actual financial benefit to each civic body.

Government Sets Out Direct Disbursement Mechanism

The GR directs the Drawing and Disbursing Officer to draw the sanctioned ₹240 crore from the relevant government account and distribute the amounts according to the approved allocation.

The order identifies the relevant controlling and drawing authorities for implementing the distribution.

The expenditure is to be booked under the specified budget head:

3604 — Local Bodies and Panchayati Raj Institutions — Stamp Duty-related compensation/assigned amounts, including the 1% surcharge intended for municipal corporations.

The GR also states that any dues payable to government and semi-government institutions may be recovered or adjusted from the sanctioned grant before distribution.

Bottom Line

Maharashtra has approved ₹240 crore for distribution to 28 municipal corporations from the 1% stamp duty surcharge for 2026-27.

But the actual distribution picture is more nuanced.

₹23.53 crore will be adjusted towards EESL dues and ₹1.56 crore towards UIDF interest, leaving ₹214.91 crore for net distribution.

Pune is the largest beneficiary, with a net allocation of approximately ₹75.12 crore, followed by Thane at ₹27.07 crore and Pimpri-Chinchwad at ₹22.04 crore.

At the other end, several municipal corporations see their entire gross entitlement absorbed through the specified deductions.

The GR therefore represents both a transfer of stamp-duty-linked revenue to urban local bodies and an accounting mechanism through which certain outstanding municipal obligations are settled before the remaining funds reach the civic bodies.

For municipal corporations, the critical number is consequently not simply the ₹240-crore headline allocation, but the ₹214.91 crore net amount and the corporation-wise figure after deductions.

Also Read: ₹1,500 Crore Disbursed from Stamp Duty Surcharges to MMRDA, & Metro Projects

The post Maharashtra Clears ₹240 Crore Stamp Duty Surcharge for 28 Civic Bodies appeared first on Square Feat India.

On 25 August 2026, the Maharashtra Revenue Department issued a statewide circular to change that. It does not create a new law. It tries to make the existing recovery power work — with named officers in every district, fixed timelines, an asset-search checklist, monthly reporting, and special priority for MahaRERA cases because the money belongs to individual flat buyers.

The circular, signed by Joint Secretary Kailas Arjun Gaikwad, supersedes the 2012 recovery instructions. Official reports state that 1,421 MahaRERA recovery cases from Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban, Thane and Pune alone involve about ₹975 crore, of which around ₹350 crore has come in so far.

That gap is why this circular matters.

Why homebuyers should care

When a promoter ignores a MahaRERA order on refund, interest or compensation, the amount can be recovered as land-revenue arrears through the Collector. That route already existed under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The problem was execution.

This circular tells every Collector, Sub-Divisional Officer and Tehsildar that MahaRERA warrants are not ordinary government dues. They involve people who may still be without their homes and without their money. Those cases must move first.

What was broken

Dedicated recovery officers were appointed in April 2025 only for Mumbai City, Mumbai Suburban, Thane, Raigad, Palghar and Pune. Even after that, collections stayed slow. Files bounced for incomplete details. Addresses were wrong. Assets were not traced. Auctions were rare. Homebuyers who had already won before MahaRERA were left chasing the same amount through another office.

What changes now

The Resident Deputy Collector in every remaining district is now the Dedicated Revenue Recovery Officer. That officer will allot RRC work, monitor Tehsildars, and send a monthly report to the government by the 5th of every month — cases received, cases closed, amount recovered, amount pending, reasons for delay, and the next step.

Every RRC must be entered in a register. Incomplete papers must be returned at once, not kept pending. After the Collector’s office confirms the amount is recoverable, the case must go to the Tehsildar within seven days.

How the money is supposed to be recovered

Once the Tehsildar gets the warrant:

• A demand notice goes to the defaulter, with 14 days to pay.
• While serving that notice, the officer must take an affidavit listing all movable and immovable property.
• If the amount is not paid, movable and immovable assets can be attached at once.
• Attached property is then to be put to public auction, with notice in the official Gazette and a widely circulated local newspaper.
• The recovered amount, after recovery expenses, is to be sent back through the Collector to the department that issued the RRC — and, in MahaRERA cases, MahaRERA must be informed immediately.

If the person is not found at the given address, officers cannot simply close the file. They must search through local bodies, police, land records, IGR (registration and stamp), RTO records and municipal or property-tax records. For companies, they can check Registrar of Companies and Ministry of Corporate Affairs records — master data, annual returns, financial statements and registered charges. Limited information may also be sought from the Income Tax Department only to identify assets.

If the property is in another taluka or another district, the RRC must be transferred immediately. If the address and asset details are so incomplete that a search is impossible, the Tehsildar must record a proper panchnama with local witnesses and send the case back — not write a vague remark and bury it.

Checks on the officers, not only on the builder

Collectors and Additional Collectors must review RRC cases during field visits and in regular revenue officers’ meetings. MahaRERA pending cases get a separate review: status, amount recovered, attachment, auction, reason for delay, and the next expected step.

Divisional Commissioners, Collectors, SDOs and the ministry’s vigilance team can inspect records without notice. Negligence can lead to a proposal for disciplinary action.

After a MahaRERA warrant is successfully recovered, the Tehsildar must inform MahaRERA at once and mark a copy to the Collector. Every stage of a MahaRERA case must be written in the RRC register.

What this does not automatically do

This is still an administrative circular. A court stay can freeze attachment. An incomplete warrant can still be returned. Auction depends on officers actually finding and selling assets. There is no public dashboard in this order, and no automatic penalty if the seven-day or 14-day clock is missed.

So this is not a guarantee that every pending refund will arrive next month. It is the clearest instruction so far that MahaRERA recoveries are a priority, that every district now has a named officer for the work, and that builder assets can be traced across land, vehicle, company and tax records instead of being treated as “not found”.

For homebuyers, the test is simple. The next few monthly reports will show whether the clock is running — or whether the file is still waiting.

Also Read: Buyer Ghosts Builder After Paying ₹49k: MahaRERA Orders Agreement Cancellation

The post Paper orders to real recovery: State puts clocks on MahaRERA homebuyer dues appeared first on Square Feat India.

The decision was announced through a Government Resolution (GR) issued by the General Administration Department on August 14, 2026.

Under the new provision, employees whose children are studying from Class 1 to Class 12 can get additional time to remain in government accommodation after retirement, subject to prescribed conditions and payment of five times the existing licence fee.

The move is aimed at ensuring that a parent’s retirement does not immediately force a school-going child to relocate or change schools during the academic year.

Government accommodation can be retained after retirement

Government employees are generally required to vacate official accommodation after retirement within the prescribed period.

The state government has now created a specific concession for cases where the retiring employee has a child studying in school and the child’s academic year is still in progress.

The concession applies to children studying in Classes 1 to 12.

However, the employee must provide the documents required to establish the child’s educational status and comply with the conditions specified in the GR.

The most important financial condition is that the employee will have to pay five times the prevailing licence fee for the period for which the accommodation is retained under this special provision.

Retirement between January and June: Accommodation till June-end

The GR divides retiring employees into two categories based on when they retire.

If an employee retires between January and June, and their child is pursuing school education from Class 1 to Class 12, the employee can retain the government accommodation until the end of June of the same year.

For instance, an employee retiring in March would be permitted to stay in the government residence until the end of June, subject to the prescribed conditions and payment of the enhanced licence fee.

The government has also indicated that employees retiring during these months need to take their child’s academic calendar into account and make arrangements for shifting and admission elsewhere after the permitted period.

Retirement between July and December: Up to June of the following year

A longer extension has been provided for employees retiring during the second half of the calendar year.

If an employee retires between July and December, and their child is studying in Classes 1 to 12, the employee can retain the government accommodation until June 30 of the following calendar year.

The GR provides a specific example.

An employee retiring between July and December 2026 can retain the government accommodation until June 30, 2027.

This provision could be particularly significant for families because employees retiring during the middle or later part of the academic year will not have to immediately move out of their official residence and potentially disrupt their child’s schooling.

Five times the licence fee will apply

The extension comes with a cost.

The government has specified that the accommodation will be available during the permitted extended period at five times the existing licence fee.

This means the concession is not an extension at the employee’s normal government accommodation charges.

The applicable licence fee will effectively be multiplied by five for the period covered by the special permission.

The GR also makes the extension subject to submission of the necessary documents relating to the child’s education.

The extension is temporary, not permanent

The government has made it clear that the relaxation is only intended to cover the relevant academic period.

Once the permitted period comes to an end, the retired employee must vacate the government accommodation immediately.

For employees retiring between January and June, the permitted period generally ends in June of that year.

For employees retiring between July and December, the permitted period can extend until June 30 of the following year.

The government has warned that failure to vacate the premises after the permitted period will invite action under the provisions of an earlier Finance Department Government Resolution dated June 3, 2026.

Why the government introduced the relaxation

The policy addresses a practical problem faced by government employees at retirement.

A government employee may retire while their child is in the middle of an academic year. If the family is required to immediately vacate the official residence, it could mean finding a new home, shifting to another locality and potentially changing the child’s school.

The new policy provides a limited window for families to complete the academic year before moving out.

In effect, the government has attempted to balance two competing considerations:

the government’s requirement to recover official accommodation after an employee’s retirement and the child’s need for continuity in school education.

Applies to government residences across Maharashtra

The relaxation is not restricted to Mumbai.

According to the GR, it applies to government residences under the General Administration Department in Greater Mumbai as well as other government residences across the state of Maharashtra.

This means eligible retiring employees occupying covered government accommodation in different parts of the state can potentially benefit from the provision.

The actual applicability, however, will depend on whether the particular accommodation falls within the scope of the GR and whether the employee meets the prescribed conditions.

What about compulsory retirement and dismissal?

The GR refers to the provisions of a Finance Department Government Resolution dated June 3, 2026, under which the rules concerning vacation of government accommodation also apply to government employees who have been compulsorily retired or dismissed.

However, the August 14 GR specifically frames the new school-education-related concession around retiring employees whose children are pursuing Classes 1 to 12.

Therefore, the educational extension should not automatically be interpreted as applying to every category of employee mentioned in the earlier rules.

Background to the decision

The latest GR follows earlier government decisions concerning retention of government accommodation after retirement.

The General Administration Department has referred to:

• A Finance Department GR dated February 16, 2013;
• A General Administration Department GR dated January 7, 2021; and
• A Finance Department GR dated June 3, 2026.

The June 3, 2026 decision had laid down instructions concerning action to be taken when retired government employees fail to vacate government accommodation within the prescribed period.

The August 14 decision introduces the specific educational consideration into this framework.

What does this mean for retiring government employees?

For eligible employees, the decision provides greater certainty around one of the biggest practical issues associated with retirement — finding alternative accommodation while ensuring that children can complete their academic year without disruption.

The benefit is particularly relevant to employees retiring between July and December, because they can potentially remain in their official residence until June 30 of the following year.

However, the employee must factor in the significantly higher accommodation cost during the extension because of the five-times licence fee.

The employee also needs to ensure that the required educational documents are submitted and that the residence is vacated immediately once the permitted period expires.

A limited relief, not a blanket extension

The government order does not give retired employees a general right to continue occupying official accommodation.

The benefit is conditional on the child being enrolled in school from Class 1 to Class 12, the timing of the employee’s retirement and compliance with the prescribed documentation and payment requirements.

The concession also has a clearly defined end date.

Once that date passes, the employee has to vacate the accommodation or face action under the applicable rules.

The bottom line

Maharashtra’s August 14, 2026 GR gives retiring government employees a temporary cushion to keep their official accommodation when their children are still in school.

The most significant benefit is for employees retiring between July and December, who can potentially retain their government residence until June 30 of the following year.

But the concession comes with two clear conditions: the child must be studying in Classes 1 to 12 and the employee must pay five times the existing licence fee during the extended stay.

After the permitted period ends, the accommodation must be vacated immediately.

Also Read: Maharashtra Govt to Pay Rent for Political Party and Govt Offices Displaced by Metro 3

The post Retiring Maharashtra Govt Employees Get Extra Time to Keep Official Homes for Children’s Education appeared first on Square Feat India.

The Revenue and Forest Department’s Government Resolution dated August 14, 2026, requires joint measurement reports in land acquisition cases to record the area attributable to each co-holder separately.

At first glance, this may appear to be an administrative change in land measurement. But for ordinary landowners, heirs, co-owners and families holding land jointly, it could have a much bigger impact: greater clarity over whose land is actually being acquired and who should receive the corresponding compensation.

The problem the government is trying to solve

Land records often show several co-holders under a single Survey Number or Gat Number. Over time, ownership can change because of inheritance, partition, sale, transfer or other transactions.

Although such land may legally have different shares, the physical subdivision of those shares may not always have been completed before a government project requires land acquisition.

As a result, during joint measurement, the entire Survey or Gat Number could be measured without separately identifying the portion physically occupied or held by each co-holder.

This becomes particularly problematic when only part of the larger parcel is being acquired.

For example, suppose a 10-acre Gat Number has five co-holders. If a government project requires only three acres, a conventional joint measurement could identify three acres as the acquired area without clearly establishing which co-holder’s portion is affected.

The acquisition authority could then name all the co-holders in the final award, while disputes could continue over how the compensation should actually be divided.

That is where the new SOP attempts to intervene.

What the new SOP changes

The government has directed that joint measurement reports should include the area attributable to individual co-holders.

The process requires notices to all co-holders and gives them an opportunity to remain present during the physical measurement.

Officials are expected to consider available revenue records, registered documents relating to subdivision or ownership, inheritance records, partition documents, gift deeds, registered sale deeds, consent of landholders and the actual position on the ground.

A share-wise preliminary map is then to be prepared.

The map must identify:

• The individual share of each co-holder
• The boundaries and directions of each share
• The area attributable to each share
• The portion of each share proposed to be acquired

This is an important shift from simply measuring the total acquired land to establishing how the acquired area relates to individual co-holders.

A major benefit for ordinary landowners

The biggest benefit for common people is clarity.

For a landowner whose property is being acquired for a road, railway, irrigation project, industrial project, public infrastructure or another public purpose, compensation is not merely an accounting figure.

It may represent the value of ancestral land, agricultural income, a family asset or the principal property owned by a household.

When multiple people have rights in the same land, uncertainty over the exact area belonging to each person can delay compensation.

The new procedure seeks to establish that information earlier in the acquisition process.

Instead of waiting until the compensation award to discover that co-holders disagree about their respective portions, the measurement exercise itself can bring those differences to the surface.

Public disclosure gives co-holders a chance to object

The preliminary share-wise maps and statements are required to be published at the village chavdi for at least 15 days.

Where necessary, publication can also be made through local newspapers.

This gives affected people an opportunity to examine the proposed division and raise objections.

This is particularly important for people who may not regularly visit revenue offices or may not have a detailed understanding of land records.

A publicly displayed map can make an otherwise complicated revenue record easier to understand.

If a co-holder believes that the proposed area or boundary is incorrect, the person gets an opportunity to challenge it before the measurement becomes final.

Disputes can be addressed earlier

The SOP provides a mechanism for dealing with objections.

If objections are received, the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records is required to conduct a hearing under the applicable provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and the Maharashtra Land Revenue Survey and Sub-Division of Survey Numbers Rules.

The government has also prescribed that such cases should be disposed of within one month of the joint measurement.

This time-bound approach is significant.

Land acquisition disputes can otherwise remain unresolved for extended periods, particularly when the disagreement concerns the identity or share of the person entitled to compensation.

Resolving the measurement-related issue at an early stage could reduce the number of disputes that ultimately reach higher authorities or courts.

The SOP could make compensation distribution faster

One of the government’s stated objectives is to make compensation distribution easier and faster.

Once the acquired area has been identified share-wise, the Special Land Acquisition Officer or competent authority can use the information while determining and distributing compensation.

This could reduce situations in which compensation is determined for an entire parcel but the authorities subsequently face difficulty deciding how much should go to each co-holder.

In cases where there is no objection within the prescribed period, the published share-wise draft can be treated as final, followed by the necessary orders and record corrections.

That could remove one layer of uncertainty from the compensation process.

It may be particularly useful for inherited family land

The new system could be especially relevant to families holding inherited agricultural land.

A single ancestral property may have several legal heirs, sometimes across multiple generations.

While the revenue record may identify several names, the physical occupation of the property may have evolved differently over the years.

When only part of such property is acquired, determining the actual share affected can become complicated.

The share-wise measurement requirement creates a formal opportunity to document the position before the acquisition process reaches its compensation-distribution stage.

This could be valuable in cases where family members live in different villages, districts or even states.

It can reduce the risk of compensation disputes

The government specifically identifies disputes over compensation distribution as one of the problems that the SOP is intended to address.

Without a clear share-wise measurement, multiple co-holders may claim the same compensation.

The result can be delayed payment, references to the competent authority and potentially prolonged litigation.

By identifying the acquired area at the co-holder level earlier in the process, the administration can potentially reduce the scope for such disputes.

However, the SOP does not mean that every ownership dispute will automatically disappear.

Where ownership itself is disputed before a court or otherwise legally contested, the parties may still have to approach the competent judicial forum.

Important protection for buyers after acquisition notification

Another significant provision concerns transactions after publication of the preliminary acquisition notification.

The SOP states that purchases, sales or transfers made after the preliminary notification should not be considered for the purpose of sub-division measurement.

This is important because otherwise subsequent transactions could complicate the land records and create additional claims during the acquisition process.

The provision therefore seeks to establish a clear cut-off point for considering transactions for the purpose of the share-wise measurement.

What it means for government infrastructure projects

The benefits are not limited to individual landowners.

For the government, faster resolution of land-related issues can mean faster possession of land required for public projects.

Roads, railways, metro systems, irrigation projects, transmission infrastructure and other public projects can be delayed when compensation disputes prevent possession.

A clearer joint measurement process could therefore improve administrative efficiency.

If disputes regarding individual shares are identified and addressed at the measurement stage, the acquisition authority may be in a better position to proceed with compensation and possession.

In the long run, that could contribute to fewer project delays caused by unresolved land-record issues.

A potential long-term benefit: better land records

There is another benefit that may not be immediately visible.

The SOP requires share-wise maps and appropriate documentation, including preparation of Share Form No. 11 and Share Form No. 12 where necessary.

This could contribute to better subdivision records.

Better records can have consequences beyond the immediate acquisition.

Clearer subdivision information can make future transactions, inheritance, partition, mortgage and other land-related processes easier to administer.

In that sense, the new SOP could gradually improve the quality of Maharashtra’s land records in areas where such measurements are undertaken.

Greater transparency between citizens and the administration

Land acquisition is inherently sensitive because the government is acquiring privately held property for a public purpose.

Transparency in determining what land is being acquired and whose share is affected is therefore crucial.

The new process introduces several transparency mechanisms: notice to co-holders, physical measurement, preparation of share-wise maps, public display, an objection period and hearings where objections arise.

These steps can give affected landowners a clearer understanding of what is happening to their property.

What common people should do

The SOP does not mean landowners should simply wait for the administration to complete the process.

Co-holders should carefully examine the preliminary share-wise map and statement when they are published.

They should also keep relevant documents ready, including registered sale deeds, partition documents, inheritance records and other documents supporting their claim.

If the proposed measurement does not correctly reflect their share or physical possession, they should use the prescribed objection mechanism within the stipulated period.

The most important point is that the preliminary measurement should not be treated as a formality.

For a landowner, it could directly influence how the acquired land and eventually the compensation are attributed.

The bigger picture

Maharashtra’s August 14, 2026 SOP is essentially an attempt to move one important part of the land acquisition process from ambiguity to documentation.

Instead of identifying only the total area being acquired, the administration will now have a framework for identifying the portion attributable to individual co-holders.

For ordinary citizens, the immediate benefit is greater clarity.

The medium-term benefit could be fewer compensation-distribution disputes and faster payment.

The long-term benefit could be more accurate subdivision records, fewer administrative disputes and faster implementation of public infrastructure projects.

The SOP cannot, by itself, resolve genuine ownership disputes. Nor does it eliminate the need for courts where title itself is contested.

But by identifying share-wise acquired land at the joint measurement stage, Maharashtra is addressing one of the practical problems that can turn land acquisition into a prolonged dispute.

For thousands of landowners affected by public projects, that administrative change could ultimately translate into something much more tangible: greater certainty about how much of their land is being acquired and whose compensation is actually due.

Also Read: HC sets aside order granting extra land to a bifurcated flat owners’ society, says bifurcation itself is final conveyance.

The post Maharashtra’s New Land Acquisition SOP Could Make Compensation Fairer for Landowners appeared first on Square Feat India.

The Urban Development Department, through a Government Resolution dated June 5, 2026, has sanctioned funds for acquiring 191.21 acres of land within the Nashik Municipal Corporation area. This land is reserved for the construction of temporary religious settlements that host saints, akhadas, and devotees during the Kumbh Mela.

The Simhastha Kumbh Mela, one of the largest religious gatherings in the world, attracts lakhs of pilgrims from across India and abroad. To accommodate religious leaders and ensure smooth event management, the government plans to expand the Sadhu Gram infrastructure in the Tapovan area.

Out of the total reserved 377 acres for Sadhu Gram and related uses, around 94 acres have already been acquired. The remaining land is now being procured through negotiated purchase based on market-linked compensation rates approved at the district level.

The approved ₹2267 crore includes ₹2264 crore for land compensation and ₹3 crore for administrative expenses. The government has clarified that this is a one-time financial sanction, and no additional funds will be provided even if project costs increase later.

Strict conditions have been imposed, including:

• Immediate payment to landowners via RTGS after finalizing compensation
• Mandatory adherence to land acquisition laws and procedures
• Accountability of Nashik Municipal Corporation and District Collector for timely possession
• Prohibition on diversion of funds for any other purpose
• Mandatory submission of utilization certificates and financial reports

Impact on the Common Man

For local residents and landowners, this decision has direct financial implications. Those whose land falls under the acquisition zone are likely to receive compensation at negotiated market rates, potentially benefiting from higher payouts compared to older acquisition methods.

However, affected landowners may also face displacement, making rehabilitation and proper compensation crucial.

For the general public and pilgrims, the move is expected to significantly improve infrastructure, crowd management, and overall experience during the Kumbh Mela. Better planning of Sadhu Gram can reduce congestion, improve sanitation, and enhance safety.

At a broader level, the decision signals the government’s intent to avoid last-minute preparations and ensure timely execution of mega religious events, which often face criticism for delays and cost overruns.

With clear funding, accountability, and timelines in place, the Nashik Kumbh Mela 2027 is expected to see more organized and efficient planning compared to previous editions.

Also Read: Ranbir Kapoor Buys ₹3.31 Crore Land in Ayodhya’s ‘The Sarayu’

The post 191 Acres Land, ₹2267 Crore Approved for Sadhu Gram In Nashik Kumbh Mela 2027 appeared first on Square Feat India.

The decision was issued through a Government Resolution (GR) by the Urban Development Department on March 30, 2026.

What is the 1% Stamp Duty Surcharge?

Under amendments to the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act (1949) and the Maharashtra Stamp Act (1958), a 1% surcharge is levied on stamp duty for property transactions such as:

• Property sale
• Gift deeds
• Mortgage transactions

This surcharge applies specifically to urban properties within municipal corporation limits and is meant to support urban local bodies financially.

₹500 Crore to Be Distributed Across 28 Municipal Corporations

The state government has approved ₹500 crore (₹5 billion) to be distributed among 28 municipal corporations.

These funds are unconditional grants, aimed at boosting urban infrastructure development and financial stability of local bodies.

Top Beneficiaries of the Fund Allocation

Among the major allocations:

• Pune Municipal Corporation – ₹1,458 crore (highest share)
• Thane Municipal Corporation – ₹553 crore
• Pimpri-Chinchwad – ₹671 crore
• Nashik – ₹270 crore
• Mira-Bhayandar – ₹338 crore
• Vasai-Virar – ₹235 crore
• Navi Mumbai – ₹243 crore

Other cities such as Nagpur, Aurangabad, Kolhapur, Solapur, and Kalyan-Dombivli also received significant allocations.

Special Deduction in Ulhasnagar Case

A notable exception in the distribution is Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation, where:

• ₹23.64 lakh has been deducted from its allocation
• This deduction is due to pending interest payments under the UIDF (Urban Infrastructure Development Fund) scheme

The deducted amount will be adjusted directly by the government.

How Will the Funds Be Used?

The funds are expected to support:

Urban infrastructure projects Civic amenities and services Financial strengthening of municipal corporations

The government has clarified that the funds are non-conditional, allowing local bodies flexibility in utilization.

Disbursement Timeline & Process

• Funds will be transferred directly to the DDO accounts of municipal corporations
• Disbursement must be completed before March 31, 2026
• Officials have been instructed to ensure immediate fund transfer

Policy & Financial Framework

The expenditure will be booked under:

Budget Head: 3604 – Compensation & Assignments to Local Bodies Linked to stamp duty surcharge compensation mechanism

The decision has been approved in consultation with the Finance Department.

Why This Matters

This move is crucial because:

Municipal corporations rely heavily on state transfers for funding It ensures steady cash flow for infrastructure projects Helps cities cope with rapid urbanisation and rising service demands

With increasing real estate transactions, stamp duty surcharge has become a key revenue stream for urban development.

The Big Picture

The ₹500 crore allocation reflects the Maharashtra government’s continued push toward:

• Strengthening urban local bodies
• Improving infrastructure financing mechanisms
• Leveraging real estate-driven revenues for city development

As cities expand and demand for infrastructure rises, such financial support will play a critical role in shaping urban growth across Maharashtra.

Also Read: ₹1,500 Crore Disbursed from Stamp Duty Surcharges to MMRDA, & Metro Projects

The post Maharashtra Govt Approves ₹500 Crore Distribution to Municipal Corporations from 1% Stamp Duty Surcharge appeared first on Square Feat India.

The Government Resolution (GR), issued by the Urban Development Department, allows the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) to use this land for infrastructure creation and revenue generation.

What Has the Government Approved?

The state government has granted in-principle approval to transfer vast parcels of government land across MMR to MMRDA under a freehold (Class-1) category, subject to certain conditions.

Total Land Transferred: 33,954.61 hectares
Regions Covered: Thane, Raigad, and Palghar districts
Villages Covered: 1,324 villages across multiple talukas

This is one of the largest land transfers to a planning authority in Maharashtra’s history.

Why This Move Is Important

The decision is aimed at:
Accelerating infrastructure development in MMR
Creating new revenue streams for MMRDA
Strengthening urban planning capabilities
Supporting long-term regional growth

The move aligns with earlier cabinet decisions to empower metropolitan authorities like MMRDA, PMRDA, and others with land resources.

Key Conditions & Rules

The government has laid down several important conditions:

1. No Objection Not Required

MMRDA will not need prior approval from the state or district authorities for developing the transferred land.

2. Land Monetisation Allowed

MMRDA can allocate and monetize the land as per its internal land disposal regulations.

3. Revenue Sharing

25% of the revenue generated from development must be shared with the Maharashtra government.

4. Phased Transfer

The land will not be handed over in one go. Instead, it will be transferred based on planning and requirement.

5. Encroachment-Free Land

District Collectors must ensure that:
Land is free from encroachments before transfer
MMRDA maintains encroachment-free status post-transfer

6. Legal & Sensitive Land Checks

If the land includes:

• Grazing land
• Temple land
• Forest land

Then necessary compliance with Supreme Court and High Court rulings will be mandatory.

7. Local Authority Permissions

If any land belongs to:

• Gram Panchayats
• Zilla Parishads

MMRDA must take prior approvals before development.

8. Compensation Liability

If any land was acquired earlier and future compensation claims arise, MMRDA will be responsible for payment.

Digital Record-Keeping Mandated

Both MMRDA and the Revenue Department must:
Maintain separate land records
Ensure complete digitisation of land data

This is expected to improve transparency and reduce disputes.

District-Wise Land Distribution

• Thane: Major share across Kalyan, Bhiwandi, Ambernath, and Thane
• Raigad: Includes Alibaug, Panvel, Pen, Uran, Karjat, Khalapur
• Palghar: Includes Vasai and Palghar talukas

Impact on Real Estate & Infrastructure

This decision could have far-reaching implications:

Boost to large-scale infrastructure projects
Increased land availability for planned urbanisation
Stronger financial position for MMRDA via land monetisation
Potential impact on land prices and development patterns

For developers and investors, this signals future supply pipelines and new growth corridors in MMR.

The Big Picture

With Mumbai’s land scarcity being a long-standing challenge, this move gives MMRDA unprecedented control over land resources, enabling it to act as a powerful urban development engine.

If executed effectively, this could redefine how infrastructure is funded and built in India’s financial capital region.

Also Read: MMRDA gives 13,000 homes for quarantine purposes

The post Maharashtra’s Biggest Land Transfer Ever: Govt Hands Over 33,954 Hectares to MMRDA appeared first on Square Feat India.

The committee will oversee the formulation of procedures for conducting on-ground surveys and fixing boundaries of Koliwadas located in Thane, Palghar, Raigad, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg districts. Mumbai city and Mumbai suburban districts have been excluded from the scope of this exercise.

Maharashtra has a coastline of approximately 720 kilometres, along which numerous Koliwadas have existed for generations. These settlements are home to traditional fishing communities engaged in hereditary marine fishing activities. However, unlike gaothans, Koliwadas do not have formally recorded boundaries in land revenue records, creating long-standing challenges related to land rights, planning, coastal regulation and development permissions.

As per the government, boundary demarcation and record entry of Koliwadas will require action under provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. In this context, the state has decided to first establish a uniform and legally robust framework for survey and demarcation before initiating district-level implementation.

The newly constituted committee will be chaired by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, and will include district collectors of all five districts, senior officials from town planning, land records, mangrove conservation, fisheries, Maharashtra Maritime Board, and the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA).

The committee’s mandate includes preparing a taluka-wise list of villages having Koliwadas, determining critical boundary references such as the High Tide Line (HTL), maritime boundaries, and mangrove limits, and recommending the formation of district-level committees for execution. It will also draft detailed guidelines and standard operating procedures for surveying and boundary fixation, along with a time-bound implementation framework for district administrations.

Importantly, the committee has been directed to study all applicable laws, rules and policies, including provisions related to boundary fixation, gaothan declaration and coastal regulation, before submitting its recommendations. The final report is to be submitted to the state government within three months.

The move is expected to have far-reaching implications for coastal land management, urban planning, CRZ compliance and protection of traditional fishing settlements, particularly in rapidly urbanising coastal districts such as Thane, Palghar and Raigad. Clear demarcation of Koliwada boundaries is also likely to reduce land disputes, bring regulatory clarity, and balance development pressures with livelihood protection.

The government resolution has been made available on the official Maharashtra government website and has been digitally authenticated.

Also Read: Govt Amends GR for GTB Nagar Sion Koliwada Redevelopment; Drops Mandatory Housing Society Resolution Clause

The post Maharashtra Govt Forms Committee to Survey and Demarcate Koliwadas Across 5 Konkan Districts appeared first on Square Feat India.

The compensation relates to land acquired during 2009–10 for the development of the greenfield Shirdi Airport at village Kakdi in Ahmednagar district (now Ahilyanagar). The land acquisition was undertaken by the Maharashtra Airport Development Company (MADC), which was designated as the Special Planning Authority for the project.

Originally, administrative approval for the airport was granted in July 2008, with financial sanctions revised multiple times over the years as the project expanded. The most recent approvals include significant allocations for remaining works, terminal building construction, apron expansion and allied infrastructure, taking the overall project cost well beyond earlier estimates.

Following the land acquisition, several landowners approached the civil court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhanced compensation. While the civil court ordered an increase in compensation based on land classification along with statutory benefits, the landowners challenged the ruling and filed appeals before the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court.

After hearing the appeals, the High Court directed further enhancement in land valuation along with applicable benefits such as solatium and interest. Acting on the court’s order, the Land Acquisition Officer and Sub-Divisional Officer, Shirdi, recalculated the payable amount up to July 31, 2025, at ₹7.10 crore. Since the payment was delayed beyond this date, additional interest at 15% was applied for the period between August 1, 2025, and November 30, 2025, taking the total payable amount to ₹7,21,14,753.

The breakup of the approved compensation includes enhanced land value, additional compensation at 12%, 30% solatium, interest at 9% for the first year, and interest at 15% for subsequent years, in line with statutory provisions and court directives.

The state government has granted administrative approval for this expenditure and clarified that the amount will be met from the existing budgetary provision under the Civil Aviation head, specifically earmarked for grants to Maharashtra Airport Development Company. The expenditure will be adjusted against earlier administrative and financial approvals granted for the Shirdi Airport project.

The government has also designated the Directorate of Civil Aviation, Mumbai, as the controlling authority, with the Deputy Director acting as the drawing and disbursing officer for the transaction.

This decision brings long-pending compensation disputes closer to closure and reinforces the government’s obligation to comply with judicial orders in infrastructure-led land acquisition cases. It also highlights the financial impact of prolonged litigation and delayed settlements on large public infrastructure projects.

The post Maharashtra Govt Clears ₹7.21 Crore Enhanced Compensation for Landowners of Shirdi Airport appeared first on Square Feat India.