Bombay High Court
Arun S/O. Dattatraya Chaudhari vs The State Of Maha. Thr. Secretary, ... on 8 August, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp.1437.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
WRIT PETITION NO. 1437 /2016
Arun s/o Dattatraya Chaudhari
Aged about 66 years
occupation: Agriculturist
R/o Near Railway Station
Chandur Railway, Tq. Chandur Railway
District Amravati. ..PETITIONER
v e r s u s
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Department of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.
2) The Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition )
Upper Wardha Project No.4
Collectorate Campus, Camp:Amravati
District - Amravati-02. .. ...RESPONDENTS
...........................................................................................................................
Mr. A.R.Ingole, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr. Vishal Gangane, Assistant Government Pleader for
Respondents 1 &2
...........................................................................................................................
CORAM: SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
MRS . SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ
.
DATED : 8 August, 2016
th
ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The Writ Petition is heard
finally at the stage of admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for
the parties.
wp.1437.16
Whether the Appropriate Government-State Government would
be entitled to take further action in the matter of land acquisition by issuance
of notice under Section 21 of the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
without a decision by the State Government on the objection under sub-
Section (2) of Section 15 of the Act, is the question that falls for consideration
in this Writ Petition.
The petitioner claims to be the owner of 7.86 hectares of land
in Gat No. 77 in Mouza Songaon. Out of the said land, 2.00 hectares of land
was sought to be acquired by the State Government for extension of Gaothan
by issuance of notice u/s 11 (1) of the Act, on 10.9.2015. The petitioner
objected to the acquisition of the land within a period of sixty days from the
publication of the preliminary notification under section 11 (1) of the Act. It is
the case of the petitioner that though the petitioner was heard, on the
objections raised, no report was prepared by the Collector, either accepting or
rejecting the objections of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, it would
be necessary for the Collector to prepare one or more reports in respect of
the lands that are notified under section 11(1) of the Act and send the same
to the Appropriate Government with the recommendations of the Collector on
the objection along with the record and proceedings so that the Appropriate
Government could take a decision on the objection, after perusal of the report
wp.1437.16
of the Collector. It is the case of the petitioner that as a report was not
prepared by the Collector after hearing the objections of the petitioner, there
was no occasion for the Appropriate Government-State Government, to take a
decision on the objections of the petitioner.
Shri Vishal Gangane, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing on behalf of the respondents states that since under section 15 of
the Act either the Collector or the person authorised by him can hear the
objections and prepare a report as is required to be prepared under Section
15 of the Act, the Collector had authorized the Executive Engineer, Bembala
Project, to hear the objections of the petitioner and prepare a report. It is
stated that the Executive Engineer, Bembala Project, has prepared a report
and the same was remitted to the Collector for decision. It is admitted that
neither has the Collector taken a decision on the same nor has the State
Government-Appropriate Authority taken a decision, as is required by the
provisions of Section 15 (2) of the Act.
On a reading of the provisions of Section 15 of the Act, it is clear
that any person interested in a land that is notified under section 11 (1) of
the Act, is required to file the objection within a period of sixty days from the
publication of the preliminary notification under section 11 (1) of the Act. If
an objection is so raised, it would be for the Collector or any person
wp.1437.16
authorised by him in this behalf, to hear the objector and prepare one or more
reports, considering the extent or the parcels of the land that are required to
be acquired. The report, along with the remarks of the Collector are required
to be remitted to the Appropriate Government, the State Government in this
case, and the State Government would be required to take a decision on the
objections. Admittedly, in this case, though the petitioner is heard by the
Executive Engineer, who was authorised by the Collector under sub-section (2)
of Section 15 of the Act, to hear the petitioner and the petitioner was also
heard by him, the Collector has not submitted the report along with his
remarks to the State Government for taking a decision on the objections.
Sub-section (3) of Section 15 provides that the decision of the Appropriate
Government, the State Government in this particular case, on the objections
made under sub-Section (2) would be final. In the instant case, the
appropriate Government-State Government has not taken a decision on the
objections of the petitioner at all. If that be so, the State Government was not
entitled to take further steps in the matter of acquisition of the land, and issue
notice to the petitioner under section 21 of the Act, for making a claim for
compensation and rehabilitation.
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the Writ Petition is partly
allowed. The notice issued by the respondents under Section 21 of the Act to
the petitioner is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are free to
wp.1437.16
comply with the provisions of Section 15(2) of the Act and take a decision
on the objections of the petitioner, in accordance with law.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to
costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
"
C E R T I F I C AT E
I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true
and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order."
Uploaded by: N.B.Sahare
P.S.
Uploaded on: 10.08.2016.
