Allowed

Gajanan Yeshvanta Jagtap and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC8 Aug 2016WP/3037/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a land acquisition award due to the incorrect application of the compensation multiplier factor. The High Court ordered respondents to recompute compensation using a multiplier of 2 as per recent notifications and judgment, directing payment within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to determine compensation with a multiplier factor of 2, declare award afresh, and pay amount within six weeks.

Gajanan Yeshvanta Jagtap and Others Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

wp 3037.16.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3037 OF 2016

¶5

1 Gajanan Yeshvanta Jagtap age: 35 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli.

¶6

2 Laxman Bhikaji Korde age: 65 years, occu: agri, R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli.

¶7

3 Bhanudas Kashiram Korde, age: 50 years, occu: Agri, R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli.

¶8

4 Rayaji Ananda Korde age: 65 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli.

¶9

5 Yeshvant Dhanaji Korde Age: major, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli

¶10

6 Pandurang Narayan Jagtap, Age: 69 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli

¶11

7 Yeshvanta Navsaji Jagtap Age: 70 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli

¶12

	{2} wp 3037.16.odt
8	Bhanudas Yeshvanta Jagtap Age: 30 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli
9	Kisan Yeshvanta Jagtap Age: 45 years, occu: agri R/o At/Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli
10	Pandurang Sakharam Korde, Age: 60 years, occu: agri R/o At Navalghavan, Post Bhandegaon, Tal & Dist. Hingoli Petitioners
	Versus
1	The State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, Irrigation Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai
2	The District Collector, Hingoli, Dist: Hingoli
3	The Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli
4	The Executive Engineer, Upper Penganga Project, Division -2 Hingoli, Tal & Dist. Hingoli Respondents
Mr.D	.K. Thote advocate for the petitioners
Mr. 3	V.M. Kagne, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents No.1 to _______________

wp 3037.16.odt

{3}

CORAM : R.M. BORDE &

K.L. WADANE, JJ

(Date : 8th August, 2016.)

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶19

(Per: R.M. Borde, J)

¶20

1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the petition is taken up for final disposal by the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶22

3 The petitioners are objecting to the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 07.04.2015, determining the amount of compensation, in respect of the acquired property. The award has been passed in respect of the land, situated in rural area by consideration of multiplier factor of 1:1. In view of the judgment delivered by this Court in Writ Petition No.4274/2016 and in pursuance to the Notification issued by the Government on 26.5.2015, the acquisition authorities are required to apply multiplier as 2 in respect of the properties situated in rural areas.

¶23

4 In view of above, the award passed by the land acquisition authorities needs to be corrected so far as the computation of amount of compensation is concerned. The respondents are thus

¶24

{4} wp 3037.16.odt

¶25

directed to determine the amount of compensation payable to the petitioners by prescription of multiplier factor 2 and declare the award afresh and pay the amount of compensation to the petitioners expeditiously.

¶26

5 The respondents are directed to determine the amount of compensation under the award in observance of the directions as above, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six weeks from today and it is accordingly directed.

¶27

6 Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

(K.L. WADANE, J) (R.M.BORDE, J)

¶29

vbd

Gajanan Yeshvanta Jagtap and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajanan Yeshvanta Jagtap 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kushal Dinkar Badgujar Vs Rajaram Nago Chavan and Others

Abdul Gani Khairulla Chaudhary Died Thr Its Lrs Maimuna Begum and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Govind Bajirao Navpute Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shashikumar Shivanand Dalgade Vs the District Collector Osmanabad

Sanket Food Products Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Vinay Navinchandra Shah and Another Vs the Commissioner of Food Safety Food and Drugs Administration Mumbai

IFS Services through Its Proprietor Lekhraj Singh Nihal Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others