Anantrao Guruanna Halgekar Throu. Poa Ajay R Singh vs Spl… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2026)

Anantrao Guruanna Halgekar Throu. Poa Ajay R Singh vs Spl… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether Plot No. 239/C can be excluded from the reservation for water tank on the ground that the requirement no longer exists. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

After learned counsel for the Petitioner sought leave to withdraw (the Petitioner being personally present in Court and having so instructed counsel), the Court permitted withdrawal and the Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Key takeaways

The Court recorded its disinclination to entertain the Petition, following which learned counsel for the Petitioner sought leave to withdraw it.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Kolhapur Circuit Bench), Writ Petition No. 12593 of 2025 — Anantrao Guruanna Halgekar (through power-of-agent Ajay R Singh) v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors; PER COURT order of R.G. Avachat and Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ., dated 20th January 2026. The petition prayed for (i) exclusion of Plot No. 239/C from the reservation for a water tank on the ground that the requirement no longer existed, (ii) setting aside of the award declared by respondent no. 1 dated 25.09.1986 to the extent of the plot, (iii) removal of the land from reservation and its restoration to the petitioner on the ground that the earlier acquisition proceedings had lapsed, and (iv) initiation of fresh acquisition proceedings under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with compensation under its provisions. Background stated in the order: possession of the plot was taken in 1988 pursuant to an award passed by respondent no. 2; a reference was thereafter filed, compensation was enhanced, and the enhanced compensation was deposited by the acquiring body in Court. After arguing for some time, and noting the Court's stated disinclination to entertain the petition, learned counsel sought leave to withdraw; the petitioner was personally present and had so instructed counsel. The Court allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn. No issue on the merits was considered or decided, and no precedent was cited. Note: the prayer describes the challenged award as dated 25.09.1986 and made by respondent no. 1, while the narration records a 1988 award and possession by respondent no. 2; both versions are reproduced here as printed.

920-WP-12593-2025.doc

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

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 12593 OF 2025

Anantrao Guruanna Halgekar Throu. Poa Ajay R Singh … Petitioner

Versus

Special Land Acquisition Officer And Ors … Respondents

Mr. Parvej Pathan for the Petitioner. Mr. V. M. Mali, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. Tuushar Sonawane for the Respondent No. 2. Mr. Abhijit Adagule for the Respondent No. 3-KMC.

——————

Coram : R.G. AVACHAT & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ. Date : 20^th January 2026.

PER COURT :

1. In the present petition the Petitioner has prayed for following prayers.

“a) Petition of the petitioners may kindly be allowed.

b) Pass an order and exclude the plot No. 239/C from the reservation for water tank as this requirement is no longer exist.

c) pass an order and set aside the award declared by the respondent no. 1 on dated 25.09.1986 to the extent of Plot No. 239/C.

d) pass an order to remove the said land from reservation and restore it to the petitioner as the previous acquisition proceedings have

1 of 2

Shubham

920-WP-12593-2025.doc

lapsed. And direct to initiate the new and fresh land acquisition proceeding under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and pay the compensation as per new provisions.

e) Any other just, equitable and consequential relief be kindly granted in favour of the petitioner as this this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

2. In brief, in 1988, the Petitioner’s property at Plot No. 239/C was taken into possession by Respondent No. 2 by passing an award. The Petitioner filed reference and compensation is enhanced. Enhanced compensation is deposited by the acquiring body in the Court.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, after arguing for some time and noting our disinclination to entertain the Petition, seeks leave to withdraw the Petition. The Petitioner is present personally in Court and has so instructed the learned Counsel.

4. The Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.

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

Digitally signed by TALLE TALLE SHUBHAM SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO ASHOKRAO Date: 2026.01.22 18:21:05 +0530

2 of 2

Shubham