Disposed

Vilas Waghoba Narsane and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC29 Jun 2016WP/2142/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In four writ petitions, petitioners challenged denial of rental compensation and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court observed lack of proper applications and directed respondents to decide pending applications on merits within nine months before disposing of writs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file application for rental compensation and unawarded interest; authority to decide within nine months; writs disposed.

Vilas Waghoba Narsane and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

{1}

¶2

916, 17, 20, 21.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2142 OF 2015

¶5

VILAS WAGHOBA NARSANE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

... with WRIT PETITION NO. 2201 OF 2015

¶7

PARAJI GUNAJI GANGOTRI AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶8

… with 920 WRIT PETITION NO. 2417 OF 2015

¶9

PRALHAD SHESHERAO MANE, LRS PADMINIBAI AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶10

... with 921 WRIT PETITION NO. 2435 OF 2015

¶11

NANASAHEB GUNWANTRAO PATIL, LRS SHOBHABAI AND OTHERS VERSUS

¶12

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶13

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. H.B. Nandagawale, Adv. h/f. Mr. V.G. Sakolkar. AGP for Respondents: Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar.

¶14

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 29th JUNE , 2016.

¶15

PER COURT:

¶16

1] Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the possession of the lands of the petitioners were taken prior to the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. However, the respondents have not awarded rental compensation. Respondents have also not awarded

¶17

{2}

¶18

916, 17, 20, 21.odt

¶19

interest under section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act. Even notices were issued to the respondents. However, the respondents did not comply with the same.

¶20

2] The Acquiring Body though served is absent.

¶21

3] Learned AGP states that the petitioners have not made any application. The petitioners have filed reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and in some matters, the benefit of interest under Section 34 has been awarded. In case the Reference Court has already awarded the benefit of interest under Section 34, certainly they cannot claim the said benefit again, before the Collector.

¶22

4] It appears that petitioners have not filed a proper application seeking rental compensation but only issued notices to the authority. Considering the above, we pass the following order :-

¶23

[a] Petitioners may file application with the authority seeking rental compensation and in matters where the interest under Section 34 is not awarded by the Reference Court, in those matters only, may claim interest under Section 34 in the said application.

¶24

[b] The authority, on receipt of the application, shall decide the said application on its own merits, in accordance with law, and policy, expeditiously after hearing all parties concerned, preferably within nine months from the date of receipt of the application.

¶25

[c] Writ petitions are accordingly disposed of.

¶26

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

¶27

grt/-

Vilas Waghoba Narsane and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vilas Waghoba Narsane and Others 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

Kaduba Ramrao Doiphode Vs State of Mah and Ors.

Chalisgaon Taluka Sahakari Dudh Udpadak Sangh Ltd. ,Chalisgaon Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhananjay Baban Kamble Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Another

Narendra Arun Bhamre and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mahadeo Shrirang Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Pradip Harihar Joshi Vs Shila Pradip Joshi