Bhausaheb Bhaskar Tambe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Bhausaheb Bhaskar Tambe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No compensation awarded and no direction to initiate acquisition proceedings was given; the Writ Petitions were disposed of in terms of the observations in paras 5 and 6 of the order dated 9th April 2019 in Writ Petition 9072 of 2016, leaving the Petitioners free, if so desirous, to go for measurement of the land of the road and, if their lands are shown to fall under acquisition (road width more than 12 meters), to agitate their grievance before the authority.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioners' lands at village Naferwadi were taken for National Highway 752-E without initiation of acquisition proceedings, entitling them to initiation of acquisition proceedings and payment of compensation. +1 more

Court's answer

The observations in paras 5 and 6 of this Court's order dated 9th April 2019 in Writ Petition 9072 of 2016 are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.

Ratio / Principle

If the Petitioners are in a position to show that their lands fall under acquisition, they may agitate their grievance before the authority.

Key takeaways

Both Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the observations made in paras 5 and 6 of the quoted order dated 9th April 2019 in Writ Petition 9072 of 2016.ratio¶¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land acquisition - National Highway 752-E, village Naferwadi - Petitioners claimed their lands were acquired in 1999 and, by 2017 application, sought initiation of acquisition proceedings and compensation, contending possession was taken without acquisition proceedings; Respondents relied on joint measurement reports (1-1-2019, 12-2-2020, 12-7-2021) said to show no Petitioner land came under acquisition. Applying the observations in paras 5 and 6 of its own earlier order dated 9-4-2019 in Writ Petition 9072 of 2016 (similar facts), the Court found those observations squarely applicable and disposed of both Writ Petitions (No. 10175 of 2018 and No. 750 of 2020) in terms thereof: the Petitioners may, if so desirous, obtain a measurement of the road land and, if their lands are shown to fall under acquisition (width beyond 12 meters), agitate their grievance before the authority. Coram: Nitin B. Suryawanshi and Vaishali Patil-Jadhav, JJ.; decision dated 26th November 2025.

{1}

wp10175-18.doc

drp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.10175 OF 2018

Haribhau Bhanudas Mandalik and Others PETITIONERS

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and Others

RESPONDENTS

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO.750 OF 2020

Bhausaheb Bhaskar Tambe and Othes

PETITIONERS

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and Others

RESPONDENTS

Mr. D. R. Jaybhar, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, AGP for Respondent - State Mr. D.P.Madkar h/f Mr.D.S.Manorkar, Adv. for Respondent No.3 Ms.V. H. Sangole, Advocate for Respondents No.4 and 5

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J. J.] DATE : 26th NOVEMBER, 2025

ORDER :

It is the case of the Petitioners that their lands were acquired for National Highway 752-E at village Naferwadi, in the year 1999. The Petitioners, in the year 2017, made an application to the Respondents contending that possession of

{2}

wp10175-18.doc

their lands is taken by the Respondents without initiating acquisition proceedings and, hence it was requested to initiate acquisition proceedings and pay the compensation.

The Respondents claim that, pursuant to proposal received from Executive Engineer, National Highway, Aurangabad for constructions of National Highway No. 752-E, joint measurement was carried out on 1^st January, 2019, 12^th February, 2020 and 12^th July, 2021 and joint measurement reports were submitted. According to the Respondents, from the said reports it is clear that no land of the Petitioners came under acquisition. Therefore, claims of the Petitioners are not maintainable.

In the order dated 9^th April, 2019 passed by this Court in similar facts, in Writ Petition 9072 of 2016 this Court has observed thus:-

“4. There is nothing on record before us to conclude that the width of the road acquired in 1997 is widened. Unless the petitioner is in position to show that the width of the 12 meter road has been widened, the petitioner would not be in a position to get any relief.

5. The petitioner, if so desires, may go for measurement of the land of the road and may proceed further as per the measurement report.

6. In case, as per measurement report the width of the road is

{3} wp10175-18.doc

more than 12 meters, the petitioner may agitate his grievance before the authority”

Aforesaid observations are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. If the Petitioners are in a position to show that their lands fall under acquisition, the Petitioners may agitate their grievance before the authority.

The Writ Petitions are, therefore, disposed of in terms of the observations made in paras 5 and 6 quoted above.

[ VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ] JUDGE JUDGE

drp/wp10175-18.doc