question was since at the disposal of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, it has to be read down as per provisions of Maharashtra Requisitioning (and Control) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1966 ( hereinafter shall be referred to 'the Act' for the sake of brevity), as the one requisitioned by the State authorities. According to him, even though tender process was undertaken by the said respondents for hiring vehicle for supply of water during scarcity period, the vehicle in question was hired for sovereign act and as such, it has to be inferred that vehicle was for carrying out sovereign duty pursuant to the order of respondent Nos. 3 and 4. He would further urge that supply of water was executed subsequent to the order of said respondents and as such, there is deem requisitioning of vehicle under the Act. In support of his contentions, he has relied upon the judgments of the Apex Court in the matter of Purnya Kala Devi vs. State of Assam and another reported in 2014(4) Scale 586 and in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Deepa Devi and others reported in 2007 AIR SCW 7882 so as to canvass that if vehicle is requisitioned, it is responsibility of the State Government to pay compensation.
