Allowed

Balaji Amines Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC13 Jun 2016CA/1229/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

HC allowed Civil applications allowing amendment of the writ petition Memo to claim benefits under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, setting aside merit examination at this stage and directing amendment to be carried out forthwith.

What did the court decide?

Civil applications allowed to the extent of seeking amendment to the memo of writ petition with a direction to carry out the amendment forthwith.

Balaji Amines Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

{1}

¶2

CA 3402.16 w 1229.16 sr. 207.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CA/1229/2016 IN WP/5712/2003 WITH CA/3402/2016 IN WP/5712/2003

¶5

BALAJI AMINES LTD VERSUS STATE OF MAHA & ORS

¶6

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Subodh P Shah AGP for Respondents: Mr. B.V. Virdhe. Advocate for respondent No.5 : Mr. G.B. Rajale.

¶7

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 13TH JUNE , 2016.

¶8

PER COURT:

¶9

1] These are applications seeking amendment to the memo of writ petition on the ground of benefit under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶10

2] Learned AGP and learned counsel for respondent No.5 oppose the applications on the ground that there is an inordinate delay in filing the application. Writ petition is filed in the year 2003 and the amendment applications are filed in January, 2016. According to learned counsel, even the project has been implemented. Possession of the land of the petitioner was taken on 22.11.1999 by private negotiations. Work of the project i.e. Tamalwadi Storage tank is also complete and the petitioners land is under submergence. The contentions in the application are denied.

¶11

3] It is a fact that the petition has been filed in the year 2003. Now, by way of amendment the petitioner seeks to avail the benefit of Section 24(2) of the right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. At the time of considering the amendment application, merits of the application need not

¶12

{2}

¶13

CA 3402.16 w 1229.16 sr. 207.odt

¶14

be considered. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 came into force from 1.1.2014. Whether the petitioner would be in a position to prove the factum of benefit of Section 24(2) of the new Act is altogether different aspect. Even if the amendment is allowed, the respondents will have every right to controvert the averments sought to be incorporated by way of amendment. Hence, the Civil applications are allowed to the extent of seeking amendment. Amendment be carried out forthwith.

¶15

2] Place the matter on 27^th June, 2016.

¶16

[K.K. SONAWANE] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE JUDGE.

¶17

grt/-

Balaji Amines Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaji Amines Ltd. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vaishali Nagsen Sarje Vs Nagsen Kondibarao Sarje

Gangadhar Vitthalrao Patil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhavrao Sambhaji Birajdar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Gita Asaram Indalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Chhatrapati Shri Shahu Technical Institute and College Aurangabad Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sharad Vishnu Gokhale and Anr. Vs Brijlal Zumberlal Sarda and Ors.