Remanded

Dagadu Gahininath Gholve and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC24 Jul 2019WP/3315/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, petitioners challenged land acquisition proceedings noting an initial notification under the Land Acquisition Act but no award. The High Court ordered respondents to initiate proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation Act.

What did the court decide?

Further proceedings were ordered to be initiated under the Right to Fair Compensation Act, to be concluded within stipulated time, in four months.

Dagadu Gahininath Gholve and Others Vs the State of… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

(1)

¶2

2-wp-3315-2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

2 WRIT PETITION NO.3315 OF 2018

¶5

DAGADU GAHININATH GHOLVE AND OTHERS..PETITIONERS

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS

¶8

Mr. Shashikant E. Shekade, Advocate for the
Petitioners.

¶9

Mr. P. S. Patil, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. Bhaginath T. Bodkhe, Advocate for Respondent
Nos.3 and 4.

¶10

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

¶11

MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

¶12

 DATED : 24th JULY, 2019.

¶13

PER COURT:-

¶14

1.The learned counsel for petitioners
submits that initially Notification under Section 4
of the Land Acquisition Act was published
13.09.2012. However, subsequently the Award was
never passed. Now the respondents are required to
initiate proceedings under Right to Fair
Compensation Act. The land is already taken in
possession by acquiring body.

¶15

2.Mr. Bodkhe, learned counsel for respondent
nos.3 and 4 on instructions submits that the
proposal for acquisition under new Act is forwarded
to respondent no.2.

¶16

(2) 2-wp-3315-2018

¶17

3.In view of the aforesaid statement, the
acquisition proceedings shall be initiated by
respondents under the provisions of Right to Fair
Compensation Act within a period of four (04)
months from today and same shall be concluded
within the time stipulated under the provisions of
Right to Fair Compensation Act.

¶18

(MANGESH S. PATIL) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
 JUDGE JUDGE

¶19

Devendra/July-19

Dagadu Gahininath Gholve and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dagadu Gahininath Gholve 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

Ramesh Raghunath Jadhav and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Subahsh Bhagwat Yelgate Vs the Union of India and Others

Dilip Baliram Chalad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Damu Pawala Randive and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Laxman Maroti Mhaske Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dipak Champalal Munot Vs the Principal Chief Secretary and Ors.