Disposed

Sanjay Kachru Adhane and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC13 Jun 2023WP/2330/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of two writ petitions regarding land measurement for a national highway project. It directed the respondent Revenue authority to consider the measurement report and documents within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.4 to consider the measurement report and decide the compensation issue within two months after hearing parties.

Sanjay Kachru Adhane and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

46a48wp2295a2330o22

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

46 WRIT PETITION NO.2295 OF 2022

¶5

NANASAHEB JAYWANTRAO WAKLE AND ANOTHER

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶8

AND

¶9

48 WRIT PETITION NO.2330 OF 2022

¶10

SANJAY KACHRU ADHANE AND OTHERS VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri R.R. Chandak i/by Shri Kshirsagar Satish M.

¶13

AGPs for Respondents 1 to 3/State : Shri V.M. Kagne and Shri

¶14

S.W. Munde

¶15

Advocate for Respondents 4 and 5 : Shri S.S. Deve

¶16

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

¶17

Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

¶18

DATE :- 13^th June, 2023

¶19

Per Court :-

¶20

The learned Advocate representing Respondent

¶21

Nos.4 and 5 tenders an affidavit in reply in each petition.

¶22

Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides

¶23

and perused the petition paper books along with affidavits in

¶24

2 46a48wp2295a2330o22

¶25

reply.

¶26

There is no dispute that the present Petitioners are identically placed as like the Petitioner in Writ Petition No.1991/2020 ( Shivaji Balkrishna Wakle vs. The State of Maharashtra and others ), which was decided by the order dated 14.12.2021. It is also conceded that, for the reasons set out in the said order, these petitions can be disposed off.

¶27

It is contended that pursuant to the earlier orders of this Court, the measurement was carried out by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records and the lands of these Petitioners, appear to have been utilised in the KhultabadPhulambri National Highway Project, as per the measurement report.

¶28

The learned AGP representing Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and the learned Advocate representing Respondent Nos.4 and 5, submit that there is no difficulty in directing Respondent No.4 to decide this issue since the Petitioners’ claims for compensation would rest on whether, their lands have been utilised in the said road and if that be so, it may amount to acquisition of land.

¶29

As such, these Writ Petitions are disposed off with the following directions:-

¶30

(a) All the Petitioners as well as Respondent No.5, shall

¶31

appear before Respondent No.4 on 28.06.2023 at 12:00 noon at the address supplied by the learned Advocate Shri Deve, which is as under:-

¶32

“The Competent Authority/ The Special Land Acquisition Officer and Sub Divisional Officer, National Highway No.752/H, Kannad, Taluka : Kannad, District : Aurangabad.”

¶33

(b) Respondent No.4 would consider the measurement carried out by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records and all such documents as may be placed before him by the litigating parties.

¶34

¶35

also permit legal assistance to represent the case of the litigating parties before Respondent No.4.

¶36

(d) We expect Respondent No.4 to decide the said issue after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties, on or before 31.08.2023.

¶37

kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

Sanjay Kachru Adhane and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kachru Adhane 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramchandra Chunnilal Asawa and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rahul Ramakant Kulkarni Vs Neeta W/O Rahul Kulkarni

Madhav Pralhad Pate Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Others

M/S Vinayak and Company through Its Partner Sunita Gopal Agrawal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nanasaheb Jaywantrao Wakle and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Tarannum Abbrarul Haq Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others