Disposed

The State of Maharashtra and Another v. Nanasaheb Manik Kendre and Others

Bombay HC16 Mar 2016CA/6655/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad disposed of writ petitions challenging land acquisition proceedings. Accepting the notification under RTFCLARR Act Section 11(1) sufficient to address compensation claims, the court left the petitioners liberty to agitate grievances regarding damages before appropriate authorities.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted liberty to agitate grievance for damages and compensation before appropriate authorities; writ petitions and civil applications disposed of.

The State of Maharashtra and Another Vs Nanasaheb Manik… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

6770.13WP+

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 6770 OF 2013

¶6

WITH CA/6657/2015 IN WP/6770/2013 WITH WP/6771/2013 WITH CA/6655/2015 IN WP/6771/2013 WITH WP/6772/2013 WITH CA/6656/2015 IN WP/6772/2013

¶7

PANDHARI PANDURANG SIRSAT AND ORS VERSUS THE COLLECTOR, BEED AND ORS

¶8

Advocate for Petitioners : Ms. P. G. Sontakke AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. N.B. Patil Advocate for Respondent no.3 : Mr. S.G. Sangle

¶9

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & V.L. ACHLIYA, JJ. Dated: March 16, 2016

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the Respondent/State and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3. With their able assistance, we have perused the pleadings in the Petitions, grounds taken therein, annexures thereto and the affidavit in reply filed by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶12

At the outset, it would be apt to reproduce hereinbelow the paragraph no.14 of the affidavit in reply filed by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, which reads thus :-

¶13

"14. I say and submit that, the acquiring body

¶14

6770.13WP+

¶15

¶16

(respondent no.3) has now vide communication dated 16.3.2015 submitted a proposal for acquisition of lands of the Petitioners and the same proposal is received by the office of answering deponent on 20.03.2015."

¶17

The learned A.G.P. appearing for the Respondent-State has tendered across Bar the Notification issued under Section 11(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The same is taken on record and marked `X' for identification. The said section itself provides limitation to complete the proceedings.

¶18

In that view of the matter, in all these Writ Petitions, the prayer clause B' is taken care of by the reply filed by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. and the copy of the Notification issued under Section 11(1) by the concerned Deputy Collector and Land Acquisition Officer. In that view of the matter, further adjudication of these Petitions, so far it relates to the prayer clause B' is concerned, is unwarranted.

¶19

So far, prayer clause `C' is concerned, the petitioners will be at liberty to agitate their grievance for damages and compensation before the appropriate authorities.

¶20

6770.13WP+

¶21

¶22

In the light of above, leaving remedy open to the petitioners for redressal of their grievance raised in prayer clause `C' and corresponding pleadings in the Petitions to that extent, these Petitions stand disposed of.

¶23

In view of the disposal of the Writ Petitions itself, the Civil Applications stand disposed of. Show cause notices issued to respondents stands discharged.

¶24

( V.L. ACHLIYA, J. )

¶25

( S.S. SHINDE, J. )

¶26

SGA

The State of Maharashtra and Another v. Nanasaheb Manik Kendre and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra and Another v. Nanasaheb Manik Kendre 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

Bhausaheb Kisanrao Hatmode Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Dodhu Dhadu Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Arun Shrinewasrao Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The State of Maharashtra and Others Vs Kantabai Bhausaheb Kuber and Anothers

Sheela Nanarao Karnewar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajendra Shivajirao Nagawade and Others Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Others