Disposed¶21

Dashrath Appa Bankar v. Union of india

Bombay HC13 Jan 2026CP/657/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dashrath Appa Bankar v. Union of India; Contempt Petition No.657 of 2024; High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur; R.G. Avachat; Ajit B. Kadethankar; National Highways Authority of India (N.H.A.I.); Section 3G National Highways Act; land acquisition compensation; C.A.L.A. Sub-Divisional Officer Akluj; disbursement of deposited compensation; undertaking not to claim compensation or award; withdrawal with liberty; fresh award; enhancement; February 16, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the petition with liberty to prosecute appropriate proceedings for the relief sought, including issuance of award, grant of compensation, enhancement, etc.; statements of respondent – N.H.A.I. and C.A.L.A. taken on record, with the deposited amount of compensation to be disbursed to the petitioner immediately. ¶21

Dashrath Appa Bankar vs Union of india — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner may withdraw the Contempt Petition with liberty to prosecute appropriate proceedings available in law for the relief sought, including issuance of a fresh award under Section 3G of the National Highways Act, grant of compensation and enhancement. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The Writ Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for, the petitioner being free to take out appropriate proceedings available in law for the relief sought, including issuance of award, grant of compensation and enhancement.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The statements of respondent – N.H.A.I. and C.A.L.A. are taken on record, including the statement of the learned AGP that the amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner immediately.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Dashrath Appa Bankar filed Contempt Petition No.657 of 2024 against the Union of India / National Highways Authority of India concerning compensation for land acquisition under Section 3G of the National Highways Act. The deposited compensation lay undisbursed with respondent no.4 – Competent Authority, Land Acquisition (C.A.L.A.), Sub-Divisional Officer, Akluj, and the petitioner alleged he was verbally pressed to execute an undertaking foregoing all future claims to compensation or award — an allegation both respondents' counsel denied, stating a notice to receive the amount had been served. On the petitioner's application, the Division Bench (R.G. Avachat and Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.) disposed of the petition as withdrawn with liberty to take out appropriate proceedings for issuance of a fresh award, grant of compensation and enhancement, taking on record the statements of N.H.A.I. and C.A.L.A., including the learned AGP's statement that the amount shall be disbursed immediately.

¶1

4-cp657.2024.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

¶3

CONTEMPT PETITION NO.657 OF 2024

¶4

Dashrath Appa Bankar ..Petitioner VERSUS Union Of India ..Respondent

¶5

Mr.Satish B. Talekar, Advocate a/w. Mr.Saurabh Veer and Ms.Prajakta S.B., Advocates i/b. Talekar and Associates, for petitioner

¶6

Mr.Vijay Killedar, Advocate a/w. Mr.Shivraj Jagadale, Advocate for respondent no.1 - U.O.I.

¶7

Mr.V.M.Mali, AGP for respondent no.2

¶8

Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate (through V.C.) with Mr.A.M.Kotimbire and Ms.A.P.Gharge, Advocates (personally) for respondents – N.H.A.I.

¶9

CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 16, 2026

¶10

ORDER :-

¶11

Heard.

¶12

Pursuant to the directions issued by this court on the last occasion, Mr.Keshav Ghodke, an Oicer of the respondents – National Highways Authority of India is present (through V.C.). His presence is marked and dispensed with.

¶13

Mr.Talekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions seeks leave to withdraw the Contempt Petition with liberty to prosecute the appropriate proceedings for the relief which the

¶14

¶15

4-cp657.2024

¶16

petitioner wants including issuance of award, grant of compensation, enhancement, etc. He submits that the petitioner has prayed for the direction to the respondents – authorities to pass fresh award under Section 3G of the National Highways Act. However, he submits that since the petition is being withdrawn by the petitioner, the petitioner may be granted liberty to take out appropriate proceedings available to him as per the law.

¶17

Mr.Talekar, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the amount deposited by the respondents authorities is not disbursed to the petitioner. He was at pains to ventilate his grievance that the petitioner was verbally asked by the concerned authorities to execute an undertaking that he shall not claim any other compensation nor shall claim any award in future. He submits that the petitioner’s right cannot be forfeited by compelling him to ile such undertaking.

¶18

Mr.Singh, learned counsel for respondent – N.H.A.I., states that the amount is already deposited with respondent no.4 – Competent Authority, Land Acquisition (C.A.L.A.), Sub-Divisional Oicer, Akluj. Both learned counsel for the respondents deny to have ever insisted the petitioner to execute an undertaking, as alleged. According to them, the petitioner was served with a notice

¶19

3 4-cp657.2024

¶20

to come and receive the amount of compensation. Mr.Mali, learned AGP makes a statement that the amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner immediately.

¶21

In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The statements of respondent – N.H.A.I. and C.A.L.A. are taken on record.

¶22

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [R.G. AVACHAT, J.]

¶23

KBP

Dashrath Appa Bankar v. Union of india

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dashrath Appa Bankar v. Union of india

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Durga Ranjeetsingh Jagtap and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Motilal Oswal Home Finance Limited Thr. Sandeep Bhivaji Patil vs the State of Maharashtra District Magistrate and Ors.

Rajaram Lakhu Munj Thr Poa T T Patil vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Principal Secretary Department of Rehabilitation and Ors.

Abhijit Alias Pandurang Chandardavari vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hindavi Public School Thr Its Head Master and Anr. vs Union of India Thr Ministry of Education and Ors.

Mahadev Shankar Wale and Ors. vs Shivchaitanya Parmartik Seva Sangh Thr. Its Joint Secretary Tajoddin S. Shaikh