This writ petition seeking compensation for destruction of orange trees due to lake seepage was dismissed because the Court held such factual issues regarding loss and damage cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction.
Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs; points kept open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1/2
wp983.1 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.983 OF 2014
Smt. Ushadevi W/o Ashok Shrawagi and ors
-vs-
Collector, Amravati and ors
Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Court's or Judge's Orders.
Shri H.R. Gadhia, counsel for the petitioners. Mrs. S.S. Jachak, AGP for the respondents.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & P. R. BORA, JJ.
DATE : 10.10.2014.
By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to grant the compensation to the petitioners for the destruction of the orange trees on the lands in question due to the ‘Yenus Lake’ seepage. The petitioners seek a direction to the respondent No.6 to decide the representation made by the petitioners in this regard.
According to the petitioners, the lands of the petitioners, which are adjoining the ‘Yenus Lake’, suffered heavy damage as there was a continuous seepage owing to the heavy rainfall and the adjoining ‘Yenus Lake’. It is stated that 550 orange trees in the fields of the petitioners were destroyed. It is stated that the lands of the petitioners have become infertile due to the adjoining ‘Yenus Lake’. The petitioners have, therefore, filed the instant petition seeking a direction to the respondents to the pay the compensation to the petitioners.
2/2
wp983.1 4
Mrs. S.S. Jachak, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, states that it would be necessary for the petitioners to file a civil suit for seeking the relief sought in the instant petition. It is stated that the petitioners would be liable to prove the loss and damage caused to the fields of the petitioners by tendering the evidence in civil Court. The learned Assistant Government Pleader sought for the dismissal of the writ petition.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the issues involved in this writ petition cannot be decided in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It would be necessary for the petitioners to plead and prove that the petitioners have suffered a great loss due to the destruction of the 550 orange trees and that the fields of the petitioners have become infertile. The aforesaid issues cannot be decided in exercise of the writ jurisdiction.
In view of the aforesaid, we decline to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
The points raised in the petition are kept open.
JUDGE JUDGE
BRW
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 to direct compensation for destruction of orange trees without proof of loss and damage.
Smt. Ushadevi W/o Ashok Shrawagi and ors
Collector, Amravati and ors
Vasanti A. Naik
P. R. Bora
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
