Disposed

Smt. Hitiksha Shirish Shah v. the Commissioner, Nashik Municipal Corporation Nashik and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Feb 2017WP/2595/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claimed non-payment of compensation agreed in an acquisition agreement for land to Nashik Municipal Corporation. The court disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation for the release of compensation, with directions for the respondent to decide within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit fresh representation for compensation release; direction to Respondent to decide within 6 weeks.

Smt. Hitiksha Shirish Shah Vs the Commissioner, Nashik… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

skn 1/2 14132.16-wpst.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO. 14132 OF 2016

¶4

Smt.Hitiksha Shirish Shah. ... Petitioner. V/s. The Commissioner, Nashik Municipal Corporation and others. ... Respondents.

¶5

Mr. Tushar Sonawane i/b Mr. P.S. Hagare for the petitioner. Mr. P.P. Kakade, AGP for the respondent – State.

¶6

CORAM : DR.MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. AND G.S.KULKARNI , J. DATE : 2^nd February 2017.

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

Not on board. Mentioned by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶9

The petitioner claims to be the owner of the property being Survey No.698, Final Plot No. 426 admeasuring 3,800 sq. mtrs. out of 2 hectares 41 ares situated at Nashik in the territorial limits of the Nashik Municipal Corporation. This property was subject matter of acquisition by the Nashik Municipal Corporation for the purpose of “Goda Park”. It was accordingly acquired under an Agreement dated 25/2/2003 entered between the petitioner and the Nashik Municipal Corporation.

¶10

skn 2/2 14132.16-wpst.sxw

¶11

The petitioner has contended that though the agreement has been executed between the petitioner and the Nashik Municipal Corporation as also the petitioner being deprived of the land, the amount of compensation, as agreed to be paid under the said agreement for acquisition has not been paid to the petitioner. The petitioner has accordingly made several representations to the Municipal Corporation in this regard, which did not bear any fruits. The last representation, as made by the petitioner, is dated 21/7/2010. This petition, however, has been filed in 2016.

¶12

Considering the above facts and in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that this petition be disposed of, by permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the Nashik Municipal Corporation making a necessary request for release of amount of compensation as payable under the above-said agreement. Such representation be made by the petitioner within a period of three weeks from today. If such representation is made, the Nashik Municipal Corporation is directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of 6 weeks from its receipt.

¶13

The petition is disposed of in above terms. No costs.

¶14

(G.S.KULKARNI, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE

Smt. Hitiksha Shirish Shah v. the Commissioner, Nashik Municipal Corporation Nashik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Hitiksha Shirish Shah v. the Commissioner, Nashik Municipal Corporation Nashik and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rehiman Shaikhlal Mulani and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kisan Jiwaji Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Anandibai Yashwant Patil (Decd) through Her Lr, Shri. Manoj Patil Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors.

Ankit Vidhya Vasini Mishra Vs Naqvi Sayed Mohammed Raza and 7 Ors.

Shri. Bhanudas Vithoba Kali Vs the State Maharashtra and Ors.

Poona Bottling Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Ors.