Disposed

Krishna Raghu Tamkar(Decd.)by Lrs. Shama Krishna Tamkar and Ors. v. the Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2012WP/7662/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding land acquisition for the Tulsi project, the petitioners sought alternate land. The High Court allowed liberty to produce documentary evidence before the Collector within four weeks and directed the authorities to process the claim within eight weeks, disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty granted to produce evidence before Collector within four weeks; authorities to process claim within eight weeks.

Krishna Raghu Tamkar(Decd.)by Lrs. Shama Krishna Tamkar and… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

5.wp766208.doc

¶2

jdk

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7662 OF 2008

¶4

Krishna Raghu Tamkar (Deceased) By Legal Representatives Shama Krishna Tamkar and Ors.

¶5

..Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

¶8

..Respondents

¶9

Mr. Amit Borkar for Petitioners. Ms. M.P.Thakur AGP for Respondents

¶10

CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J J.

¶11

DATE : FEBRUARY 06, 2012.

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

1. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners. The

¶14

grievance of the Petitioners is that the land of the Petitioners was acquired for Tulsi project way back in 1985. The counsel for the Petitioners has submitted that the Petitioners, therefore, are entitled to have an alternate land. It is contended that though the Petitioners approached the authorities for the purpose of allotment of alternate land, however, till this date, no steps are taken and therefore, the present petition is filed.

¶15

2. The learned A.G.P. has submitted that the claim of the

¶16

¶17

5.wp766208.doc

¶18

Petitioners for allotment of alternate land though considered, however, for want of requisite evidence documentary or otherwise to substantiate the case of Petitioners, the claims of the Petitioners for allotment of alternate land, could not be decided.

¶19

3. The counsel for the Petitioners seeks liberty of this Court to produce the evidence documentary in support of their claim for allotment of alternate land before the Collector, Kolhapur within a period of four weeks from today. The learned A.G.P. states that if the Petitioners produce the evidence as required, the claims of the Petitioners shall be processed on the basis thereof in accordance with law and procedure within a period of eight weeks from the date of such production of evidence by them.

¶20

4. In view of the above referred facts and circumstances, it is open to the Petitioners to approach the authorities accordingly and in view of the statement made by the learned A.G.P. nothing further is required to be done in the present Writ Petition. The same is disposed of accordingly.

¶21

[ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [ D.D.SINHA, J. ]

¶22

Krishna Raghu Tamkar(Decd.)by Lrs. Shama Krishna Tamkar and Ors. v. the Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Raghu Tamkar(Decd.)by Lrs. Shama Krishna Tamkar and Ors. v. the Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Nandkumar @ Nanaso Mahadeo More Vs State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Public Works Dept and Ors.

Shri. Vishwasrao Sukhdeo Deokar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Navnath Keshav Kapse Vs State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Sampat Ramchandra Ingale and Ors. Vs Shri. Kisahn Hariba Ingale and Ors.

Shri. Dallu Rama Bhogulkar Vs the Collector and Deputy Director for Rehabilitation Kolhapur and Ors.

M/S. Ambika Timber Mart, through Mr. Nitin Somchand Jiwani and Ors. Vs Bank of Maharashtra and Ors.