Disposed

Bhagirathi Gangadhar Bhujbal and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC15 Nov 2016WP/7489/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

He agreed that respondents must compute and pay land acquisition compensation according to the Right to Fair Compensation Act 2013 rather than the old Act, while requesting petitioners to approach relevant authorities regarding the absentee status of the original award holder.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to compute compensation as per the new Act and pay accordingly pending resolution of the absentee status issue by concerned authority.

Bhagirathi Gangadhar Bhujbal and Another Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

WP 7489/13

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

 WRIT PETITION NO.7489/2013

¶6

Bhagirathi W/o Gangadhar Bhujbal & Another.

¶7

..Petitioners..

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra & others.

¶10

 ...Respondents...

¶11

 .....

¶12

Shri U.R.Awate, Advocate for petitioners.
Smt.P.V.Diggikar, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3.
Shri A.V.Hon, Advocate for for respondent no.4.

¶13

 .....

¶14

CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
 K.L. WADANE, JJ.

¶15

DATE: 15.11.2016

¶16

ORDER :

¶17

1]Mr.Awate, learned counsel for the petitioners

¶18

submits that the petitioners are entitled for the

¶19

compensation as per the new Act. The provisions of

¶20

Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and

¶21

Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and

¶22

Resettlement Act, 2013, would apply in the present case.

¶23

The learned counsel further submits that even the award

¶24

is not passed within two years from the declaration u/s 6
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The learned counsel
further submits that the award is passed in the name of
husband of petitioner no.1 namely Gangadhar Bhujbal and
the petitioner no.2 is their son. Gangadhar Bhujbal is
missing and not heard of since 1998. The learned counsel
submits that as per the civil jurisprudence, a person if
he is unheard for seven years and more, is deemed to be
dead.

¶25

2]The learned AGP submits that from the date of

¶26

issuance of corrigendum to declaration u/s 6 of the Land
Acquisition Act, the award is passed within two years and
as such bar of Section 11 would not apply. The affidavit

¶27

is filed on record stating that if the compensation is
not paid, then the same would be computed as per the new
Act.

¶28

3]Considering the contentions of the learned counsel
for the respective parties and also going through the
affidavit in reply filed by the respondent no.3, it is
manifest that the respondents have agreed to pay
compensation as per the new Act. Paragraph no.10 of the
affidavit in reply reads as under:-

¶29

WP 7489/13

¶30

- 3 -

¶31

“10] With reference to para No.12 and 13 of
the petition, I say and submit that, the
contentions raised in this paragraph are not
true and correct and hence not admitted to
these respondents. In the present case the
land has been acquired as per the provisions
of section 126 of MRTP Act and therefore the
provision laid down in section 11(A) of the
Land Acquisition Act is not applicable in the
present case. It is further respectfully
submitted that in the meanwhile new Act came
into force namely Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
w.e.f. January, 2014. In pursuance of the new
Act Government has issued the circular dated
09/05/2014 informing that if award is passed
u/s 11 of the old Act on or before 31/12/2013
and if payment of compensation is not paid as
per said award then authorities are directed
to pay amount of compensation as per new Act.
In this view of the matter the amount of
compensation will be paid to the concern
persons. It is submitted that Hon.High Court
pleased to pass order dated 13/09/2013 to
maintain status quo was Rs.12 lacks. Now the
amount of award is increased & today it is
approximately Rs.21 lacks. Therefore it is

¶32

WP 7489/13

¶33

- 4 -

¶34

humble request to dismiss the petition at
early as possible & save the money of
government & also inconvenience of Sai
Devotees. Copy of circular dated 09/05/2014
is annexed herewith and marked as EXHIBIT R-
1.”

¶35

4]Considering the said affidavit filed by the

¶36

respondent no.3 and the fact that the respondents have
agreed to pay compensation as per the new Act, the
respondents shall compute the compensation as per the new

¶37

Act and make the payment accordingly. As far as the
contention of the petitioners that the award is passed in
the name of husband of the petitioner no.1 and father of

¶38

the petitioner no.2, who is unheard since 1998 and the
same tantamounts to civil death, the petitioners may
represent this fact before the authority concerned. The

¶39

authority shall consider the said aspect and take
appropriate steps expeditiously accordingly. Writ
petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶40

ndk/ c1511163.doc

Bhagirathi Gangadhar Bhujbal and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagirathi Gangadhar Bhujbal and Another 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

Sandip Jugalkishor Agrawal Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Vinay Tilokchand Karnavat Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Sandip Jugalkishor Agrawal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dnyanada Bhagyaravi Kulkarni Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kishor Suresh Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajendra Shikharchand Patodi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others