Disposed

Bapurao Avadhut Badgujar and Others v. the Governmnet of India and Others

Bombay HC7 Aug 2023WP/9503/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of four writ petitions concerning pending applications for statutory benefits following land acquisition awards. The Court directs the relevant Competent Authority to decide the applications within 60 days without expressing a view on jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.5 to take a decision on the pending applications of the Petitioners within 60 days.

Bapurao Avadhut Badgujar and Others Vs the Governmnet of… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

27 wp 9523.23

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

27 WRIT PETITION NO.9503 OF 2023

¶5

BAPURAO AVADHUT BADGUJAR AND OTHERS VERSUS

¶6

THE GOVERNMNET OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶7

AND

¶8

28 WRIT PETITION NO.9559 OF 2023

¶9

SANJAY MULCHAND KATARIYA

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶12

AND

¶13

37 WRIT PETITION NO.9583 OF 2023

¶14

SANJAY SUPDU CHAUDHARI POWER OF ATTORNEY RAVINDRA SUPDU CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS

¶15

VERSUS

¶16

THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER NATIONAL HIGHWAY NO 6 AND OTHERS

¶17

AND

¶18

67 WRIT PETITION NO.9698 OF 2023

¶19

MANISHA SANJAY MODI

¶20

VERSUS

¶21

THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶22

Advocate for Petitioners : Ms. Kale Sakshi Ajit Standing Counsel for UOI / Respondents : Mr. B.M. Dhanure Advocate for Respondents / NHAI : Mr. S.P. Urgunde

¶23

( 2 ) 27 wp 9523.23

¶24

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ. DATE : 7^th August, 2023

¶25

P.C. :-

¶26

The learned Advocate Shri. Urgunde is on the Panel of the National Highway Authority of India and, hence, we called upon him to cause his appearance on behalf of Respondent Nos.2 to 4.

¶27

In all these petitions, the Petitioners have received their Award amounts in their respective cases. In particular, clause 6 of the Award indicates that, they would be at liberty to claim statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 after the issue is decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Subsequently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has delivered it's judgment in Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others, (2019) 9 SCC 304 .

¶28

The grievance of the Petitioners is, that they have approached Respondent No.5 through their applications in the light of the above. However, since December 2019/March 2023, these applications are pending without any decision by Respondent No.5.

¶29

The learned A.G.P. submits that, Respondent No.5 may not have the jurisdiction to deal with these applications and the Petitioners may have to

¶30

approach the Executing Court.

¶31

We are of the view that, if the District Collector can express an opinion/decision on the pending applications, it would facilitate the Petitioners to avail of a remedy, as may be permissible in law and/or may challenge the decision of Respondent No.5, if they are of the view that the said decision is not sustainable.

¶32

In view of the above, these petitions are disposed off , with a direction to Respondent No.5 to take a decision on the pending applications of the Petitioners.

¶33

We make it clear that we have not expressed any view as regards the jurisdiction of Respondent No.5. What we desire is, that Respondent No.5 would consider the law applicable and take a decision on these applications, leaving it to the Petitioners, thereafter, to adopt a course, as may be advised. Let such decision be pronounced by the District Collector within 60 days.

¶34

[Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.] [RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.]

¶35

mub

Bapurao Avadhut Badgujar and Others v. the Governmnet of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bapurao Avadhut Badgujar and Others v. the Governmnet of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Appasaheb Haribhau Patil Vs the Union of India through Project Director and Others

Pandharinath Vishvanath Pawar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Vijay Hiraman Shinde and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhrupat Eknath Borkar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Rajendra Kishanlal Jaiswal Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Bansi Dagadu Durgude Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector Beed and Others