Allowed

Shrikant Prakashrao Mungal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC29 Sept 2014WP/8367/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition challenged an order rejecting an application for a Project Affected Persons certificate. The Court held that a Government policy dated 2004 restricting such certificates to those with less than one hectare could not apply to land acquired in 1992, following earlier judgments in identical matters. It directed the respondents to issue the certificate.

What did the court decide?

Respondents No. 2 to 4 directed to issue Project Affected Persons certificate to the son of the petitioner within three months.

Shrikant Prakashrao Mungal Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

wp8367.13

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 8367 OF 2013

¶5

Shrikant s/o Prakashrao Mungal Age 23 years, Occ. Nil, R/o. Mugat, Tq. Mudkhed District Nanded ...Petitioner versus 1. The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Department of Revenue & Forest Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Collector, Nanded 3. The Deputy Collector 9Rehabilitation), Nanded, District Nanded 4. The District Rehabilitation Officer District Nanded ...Respondents ….. Mr. Amit A. Mukhedkar, advocate for the petitioner Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents ..... CORAM : R. M. BORDE AND V. K. JADHAV, JJ. DATED : 29^th SEPTEMBER, 2014

¶6

JUDGMENT (PER R. M. BORDE, J.) :-

¶7

Heard.

¶8

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of counsel

¶9

wp8367.13

¶10

-2-

¶11

for respective parties, matter is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

¶12

The petitioner is assailing the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Rehabilitation, Nanded dated 19.10.2012 rejecting the application for issuance of project affected persons certificate. It is not matter of dispute that the land to the extent of 1 Hectare 28 Gunthas have been acquired for Upper Penganga project. The petitioner tendered an application for issuance of project affected persons certificate, however, the same has been rejected referring Government Resolution dated 23.8.2004 which specifically prescribes that in the event land available with the petitioner for the purpose of effective cultivation exceeds 1 Hectare, certificate as requested shall not be issued. The government policy is dated 23.8.2004 whereas the land belonging to the petitioner has been acquired in the year 1992. As such the aforesaid Government policy would not be an impediment in the instant matter for issuance of project affected persons certificate. In identical matters decided by the Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 6192 of 2010, decided on 18.10.2010 as well as in writ petition No. 2286 of 2013, decided on 25.3.2013, directions as regards issuance of project affected persons certificate were issued. In the light of the decisions rendered by this Court referred to above, this petition also deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.

¶13

wp8367.13

¶14

-3-

¶15

Respondents No. 2 to 4 are directed to issue project affected persons certificate to the son of petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from today. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion as regards entitlement of the petitioner to claim benefits as a project affected person while securing employment or any other benefit under the Government scheme/policy.

¶16

Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

( V. K. JADHAV, J.) ( R. M. BORDE, J. )

¶18

rlj/

Shrikant Prakashrao Mungal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shrikant Prakashrao Mungal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asma Parveen Sk.Iqbal Vs Shaikh Iqbal Shaikh Ismail Parkar

The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs Satish Dhondiba @ Dhondiram Malshette and Others

Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation Latur Vs Harishchandra Vaijanath Chatekar and Others

Bharat Prabhakar Sabde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suman Dattu Bhange and Othres Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Asmita Infra Developers Vs the Sugar Commissioner, Maharashtra State , Pune and Ors.