Vinayak Uttamrao Sukale vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3654 Bom

                                                                                          wp6658.14.doc
                                                     1


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD 




                                                                                          
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 6658 OF 2014     




                                                                  
    Vinayak Uttamrao Sukale
    age 65 years, occ. Agril
    r/o Sonegao Tq. Vashi
    Dist. Osmanabad                                                           .. PETITIONER




                                                                 
    VERSUS
     
    1.      The State of Maharashtra
            Through Secretrary
            Irrigation Department




                                                   
            Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.

    2.      The Collector,
            Collector Office,
            Osmanabad
                               
                              
    3.      The Dy. Collector (Land Acquisition)
            Medium Project No. 2,
            Collector Office,
            Osmanabad.
      


    4.      The Executive Engineer
            Osmanabad Minor Irrigation
   



            Division Osmanabad                                                .. RESPONDENTS

    Mr. N.J. Pahune Patil, advocate for petitioner.
    Mr. V.M. Kangne, AGP for the State.  
                                                          =====





                                                           CORAM :  R.M. BORDE &
                                                                      K. L. WADANE, JJ.  

DATE : 7th JULY, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R.M. BORDE, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the

consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

wp6658.14.doc

3. Agricultural properties belonging to petitioner are being taken in

possession for the purpose of construction of canal. Respondents have

initiated land acquisition proceedings with issuance of section 4 notification

on 19-04-2014. The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is enforced with

effect from 01.01.2014. In view of section 24(1)(a) of the Act of 2013, where

no award under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act has been made then

all the provisions of the Act of 2013 relating to determination of

compensation shall apply. In the instant matter, proceedings are initiated

after enforcement of the Act of 2013 however, the provisions of old act have

not been made applicable. It shall be mandatory for the respondent

authorities to initiate fresh proceedings under the Act of 2013. The

proceedings initiated under the old act after enforcement of the Act of 2013

cannot be said to have been saved. Respondents are as such directed to

initiate the land acquisition proceeding in accordance with the provisions of

the Act of 2013 and pass award as expeditiously as possible, preferably

within a period of one year from today. Rule made absolute. No costs.

    ( K. L. WADANE )                                                                 ( R. M. BORDE )





          JUDGE                                                                            JUDGE

    dyb