Bombay High Court
Saishradha Charitable Trust ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 27 July, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
wp1497.16
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1497 OF 2016
1) Shri. Saishradha Charitable Trust,
Saundalgaon, Tq-Ambad,
Through its President-
Bhimrao Shankarrao Jadhav,
Age-65 years, Occu:Business,
R/o-Low Income Group Housing
Society, Mukundwadi, Aurangabad,
Dist-Aurangabad,
2) Sau. Satyabhamabai w/o Bhimrao Jadhav,
Age-62 years, Occu:Household,
R/o-As Above.
...PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through: Secretary, Revenue
& Forest Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32,
2) The Deputy Collector & Land
Acquisition Officer,
Collector Office, Jalna,
District-Jalna,
3) Sau. Ashabai w/o Narayan Giri,
Age-45 years, Occu:Service,
R/o-Belura, Tq. & Dist-Beed,
::: Uploaded on - 28/07/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 00:34:35 :::
wp1497.16
2
4) Project Director,
Project Implementation Unit,
Aurangabad,
National Highways Authority of India,
N-4, B-23, Near Kamgar Chowk,
CIDCO, Aurangabad,
Maharashtra-431003
...RESPONDENTS
...
Mr. C.V. Thombre Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr.S.S. Dande, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. P.V. Ambode Advocate for Respondent No.3.
Mr. D.S. Manorkar Advocate h/f. M/s. M.V. Kini
& Company for Respondent No.4.
...
CORAM: R.M. BORDE AND
A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.
DATE : 27TH JULY, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER R.M. BORDE, J.] :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
With the consent of the learned counsel for the
parties, taken up for final disposal.
2. The Petitioners are praying for
referring of the dispute raised relating to the
property acquired by the Highway Authorities, for
appropriate decision to the Civil Court.
wp1497.16
3. The Petitioners claim that initially they
possessed 100 R land i.e. 1 Hector, out of which
they have sold 99 R land in favour of Respondent
No.3. The Highway Authorities have acquired the
property, inclusive of 1 R land which remained with
the Petitioners. The Petitioners however contend
that the whole compensation for the acquired area
has been withdrawn by Respondent No.3. It is
further stated that the dispute raised by the
Petitioners is required to be referred to the
Civil Court in view of Section 3-H sub-clause (4)
of the National Highways Act, 1956 and the dispute
relating to the title of the acquired property
cannot be adjudicated by the competent authority.
4. Since the Petitioners have raised dispute
relating to the title of the acquired property and
entitlement of Respondent No.3 to claim the amount
of compensation, the dispute needs to be referred
to the Civil Court for proper adjudication.
wp1497.16
5. It is informed that Respondent No.3 has
already received the amount of compensation, which
shall remain with the concerned Respondent subject
to the outcome of the proceedings before the Civil
Court.
6. The impugned order passed by the
competent authority is set aside and the objection
raised by the Petitioners dated 7th December 2015
shall be referred for the decision of the
Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction
within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land
is situated i.e. District Court, Jalna,
expeditiously.
7. Rule is made absolute to the extent as
specified above. There shall be no order as to the
costs.
[A.I.S.CHEEMA, J.] [R.M. BORDE, J.]
asb/JUL16
