Bombay High Court
Sarika Balaji Bande vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 5 July, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
920.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4513 OF 2016
Sarika d/o Balaji Bande ... Petitioner
@ Sarika w/o Baswaraj Nirne
Age 31 years, Occu: Unemployed
R/o Undri,Tq. Mukhed,
District Nanded, presently
residing at Gawhan Tq. Jalkot,
district Latur
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through The Secretary
Earthquake & Rehabilitation
Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.
2. The District Collector,
Nanded, District Nanded.
3. The Deputy Collector ... Respondents
(Rehabilitation) Nanded,
District Nanded
Mr. Anmole Kedar G. h/for Mr. S. B. Gastgar, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for the Respondents.
CORAM : R. M. BORDE &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE : 5th July, 2016
ORDER:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and the
petition is heard for final disposal by the consent of
learned counsel for the respective parties.
920.odt
3. The petitioner is objecting to the order passed
by the Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation), Nanded
refusing her request to issue Project Affected Persons
Certificate. It is an admitted fact that the land
belonging to the petitioner to the extent of 12 R has
been acquired prior to 03.05.2010. The request made by
the petitioner for issuance of Project Affected
Persons Certificate has has been turned down by the
respondents relying on the decision taken by the
Government on 03.05.2010.
4. The policy prescribes that the land holder whose
land to the extent of more than 20 R has been acquired
shall be held eligible to claim Project Affected
Persons Certificate subject to fulfillment of certain
other requirements mentioned in the resolution.
5. It is an admitted position that at the time of
acquisition of the land belonging to the petitioner,
the policy formulated on 03.05.2010 was not in vogue.
In this view of the matter, relying upon the policy
declared by the Government on 03.05.2010, the Assistant
Collector ought not to have turned down the request
made by the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances
of the case, the order impugned in the petition,
920.odt
rejecting the request of the petitioner to issue
Project Affected Persons Certificate is quashed and set
aside and the respondents are directed to issue
Project Affected Persons Certificate to the petitioner
as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a
period of eight weeks.
6. Rule is accordingly made absolute. There shall
be no order as to costs.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) (R. M. BORDE, J. )
JPC
