A PIL filed to restore a flat on specific land was dismissed by the High Court of Bombay. The court held that the respondent could not grant the relief as the matter was already subsumed by a Land Acquisition Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, passed by the Collector on 05.03.2015.
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.
30pil83-15
spb/
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 83 OF 2015
Lawrence Chettiar … Petitioner.
V/s.
Government of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents.
Mr. Shailendra Singh i/by J. P. Consultia for the Petitioner. Mr.G.W. Mattos, AGP for the State/Respondent Nos.1,2,7 & 8. Mr. D. P. Singh a/w. Mr. Aditya Thakkar, for Respondent Nos. 10 and 11. Ms. Tripti Puranik, Advocate for the -BMC.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE AND MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI,JJ.
DATE : 22nd AUGUST, 2016
P.C. :
1 Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the Corporation and learned AGP for the State.
2 Learned AGP on behalf of the State Government has invited our attention to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Sub-Divisional Officer. He submitted that on 05.03.2015 an Award under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has
1/2
Borey
spb/ 30pil83-15
been passed by the Collector/LAO. He submitted that from the record it is abundantly clear that the property in question was not a lake after 1976-77. It is submitted that the Award has been passed for the purpose of acquiring this property and for reserving it as recreation ground on behalf of the Bombay Municipal Corporation. In view of this Award, the grievance of the Petitioner does not survive. It is the case of the Petitioner that there was a flat on the said area of land and the petitioner was seeking permission/direction to restore the said flat. In our view such a relief cannot be granted in view of the Award which has been passed by the Land Acquisition Officer dated 5th March, 2015. It is, therefore, not possible to grant the reliefs claimed by the Petitioner in this PIL.
3 The Petition is therefore, dismissed.
(MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI,J.) (V. M. KANADE,J.)
2/2
Borey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether relief can be granted to restore a flat on land after a Land Acquisition Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was passed.
Whether the execution of an Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 bars further judicial intervention in the underlying land dispute.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Lawrence Chettiar
Government of Maharashtra
V. M. Kanade
Mrs. Swapna Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
