Disposed

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Dec 2018WP/10091/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Collector to decide on the payment of compensation based on the statement made by the petitioner during the hearing, disposing of the writ petition with liberty to approach appropriate authorities if necessary.

What did the court decide?

Direct the Collector to deal with the issue of payment of compensation in accordance with the statement made before the Court.

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

wp 10091-17.doc

¶2

DDR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 10091 OF 2017

¶6

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Maharashtra & ors. .. Respondents

¶9

Mr. P.B. Bhargude for the petitioner.

¶10

Mr. A.B. Vagyani GP a/w. Nisha Mehara, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 8.

¶11

Mr. Sameer M. Shingate, Sub-Divisional Officer, Ichalkaranji. Mr. S.S. Mane, Superintending Engineer, PWD, Kolhapur. Mr. Sanjay D. Sonawane, Executive Engineer, PWD Kolhapur.

¶12

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, CJ. & M.S. KARNIK, J. DATE : 10^th DECEMBER, 2018

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

Learned Government Pleader appearing for

¶15

respondent Nos. 1 to 8 submits that Review Petition came to be

¶16

dismissed on 24^th August, 2018.

¶17

Learned Government Pleader submits that within

¶18

two months compensation amount as per the order passed by this Court on 21/4/2015 in Writ Petition No. 10072 of 2013 will be paid to the petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner

¶19

1/3

¶20

wp 10091-17.doc

¶21

further submits that for last six years, without giving compensation to the petitioners, the respondents utilized the property for the purpose of road.

¶22

After going through the facts of the case, we find that the petitioner's land has been acquired for the purpose of road. The Writ Petition No. 10072 of 2013 challenging the Award dated 31/5/2012 came to be filed by the petitioner and by an order dated 21^st April, 2015, this Court made the Rule absolute. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act and the Award dated 31/5/2012 only to the extent of the share of the petitioner was quashed and set aside. The respondents were directed to proceed with the acquisition of the share of the petitioner in the said land in accordance with law.

¶23

Thereafter Review Petition (Stamp) No. 30556 of 2017 came to be filed by the State and the same is dismissed on 24^th August, 2018. This Petition came to be filed on 9^th June, 2017 by the petitioner.

¶24

2/3

¶25

wp 10091-17.doc

¶26

We direct the Collector to deal with the issue of

¶27

payment of compensation in accordance with the statement made today before the Court.

¶28

The Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take resort to the appropriate remedy if the occasion so arises.

¶29

(M.S. KARNIK, J.) ( CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶30

3/3

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Mr. Badshah Husain Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Govind Krishna Shelar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Huhtamaki Ppl Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Environment Dept. and Ors.

Mohammad Sadiq Sheikh Father of Late Mohsin Sheikh Vs State of Maharashtra through the Collector District Pune and Ors.

Dhanesh Champalal Gandhi Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mohammad Sadiq Sheikh Father of Late Mohsin Sheikh Vs State of Maharashtra through the Collector District Pune and Ors.