Quashed

Shankarrao S/O Madhorao Nakade v. the State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary Revenue and Forest Department, Mumbai and 2 Others

Bombay HC18 Mar 2015WP/3279/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur, accepting the petitioner's challenge based on a previous similar judgment, quashed the Land Acquisition Award dated 30.10.1999 for violating the time limit under Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

What did the court decide?

quashed the Award dated 30.10.1999 and disposed of the writ petition with no order as to costs.

Shankarrao S/O Madhorao Nakade Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

WP3279-14

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 3279/2014

¶5

(SHANKARRAO MADHORAO NAKADE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAH. & ORS)

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

- - - - Shri N.A. Vyawahare, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. A.R. Taiwade, A.G.P. for the R-1 & 2.

¶10

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ.

¶11

DATE : MARCH 18, 2015.

¶12

By this petition, the petitioner challenges the Award passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground that it was not passed within a period of two years from the issuance of the Section 6 notification as required by the provisions of Section 11-A of the Act of 1894.

¶13

It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that in the proceedings filed by the other land holder challenging the Award passed in furtherance of Section 6 notification issued in this case, this Court has, by an order dated 11.02.2014 allowed the writ petition and quashed the Award dated 30.10.1999.

¶14

The land of the petitioner was also acquired in pursuance of the Section 6(2) notification published on 18.09.1997 as in the case of other land holder in Writ Petition No.2587 of 2001. In fact, the petitioner is a joint owner of the land that was acquired by the said notification. It is held by this Court in the order dated 11.02.2014 in Writ Petition No.2587 of 2001 that the Award was not passed within a period of two years from the date of issuance of notification under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 and, hence, the same was void. If the Award is held to be void by the order dated 11.02.2014 in the aforesaid writ petition,

¶15

WP3279-14

¶16

¶17

it would be necessary to grant the prayer made by the petitioner in the instant writ petition.

¶18

Hence, we quash the Award dated 30.10.1999 and dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs.

¶19

JUDGE JUDGE

¶20

APTE

Shankarrao S/O Madhorao Nakade v. the State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary Revenue and Forest Department, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankarrao S/O Madhorao Nakade v. the State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary Revenue and Forest Department, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Narayan S/O Parasram Meshram, Deceased through Lrs Kalpana Narayan Meshram and Others Vs Smt. Sheetal Wd/O Vinay Meshram and Another

Archana W/O Sunil Kale Vs Sunil S/O Rameshrao Kale

Archana W/O Sunil Kale Vs Sunil S/O Rameshrao Kale

Shri Arvind Shrawan Kashiwar and Others Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Tribal Development, Mumbai and Others

Ravidayal S/O Ishwardayal Patle Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, Ministry of General Administration, Mumbai

Sudam S/O Kondiba Darade Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of Education Mumbai and Others