Siddi Yousuf Hyder Siddi Hyder ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 1478 Bom

                                        {1}
                                                                 wp 1672.16.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      WRIT PETITION NO.1672 OF 2016

 Siddi Yousuf Hyder s/o
 Siddi Hyder Hussain
 Age: 81 years, occu: Agril
 R/o Hyder Baugh No.2
 Behind Devi Mandir,
 Degloor Naka to Maltekdi Road,
 At & Dist. Nanded                                                   Petitioner

          Versus


 1        The State of Maharashtra
          Through Collector, Nanded
          Tq. & Dist. Nanded


 2        The Deputy Collector
          (Land Acquisition, Building
          & Communication), Nanded


 3        Nanded-Waghala City Municipal
          Corporation, Nanded
          through Municipal Commissioner,
          Nanded, Dist. Nanded


 4        Taluka Inspector of Land Records
          Nanded                                                 Respondents

Mr. P.G. Godhamgaonkar advocate for the petitioner Mr. V.M. Kagne Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.1, 2,

Mr. S.P. Urgunde advocate for respondent No.3.

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

                                          (Date : 5th APRIL, 2017.)





                                             {2}
                                                                      wp 1672.16.odt

 ORAL JUDGMENT
 (Per: R.M. Borde, J)


 1        Heard.


 2        Rule. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up

for final disposal at admission stage.

3 According to the petitioner, an area to the extent of 481

square meters out of survey No.117/B situated at Nanded has

been taken in possession by the respondent Corporation for public

purposes. The petitioner was served with a notice under section

9(3) of the Land Acquisition Act on 13.9.2011 and after following

the procedure prescribed under law, Award came to be declared

on 23.10.2012. Although the Award declared by the Land

Acquisition Officer records the name of the petitioner, in E-

statement as well as body of the Award, though the amount of

compensation payable to the petitioner has been determined, the

amount was not disbursed on account of mistake occurred in

preparing the E-statement. In the E-statement prepared by the

respondent Collector, the survey number of the acquired land has

been wrongly recorded as 118/A instead of 117/B. The petitioner

was served with the notice for receiving the amount of

compensation on 31.12.2013, however, amount was not paid, on

{3} wp 1672.16.odt

account of occurrence of the mistake in the E-statement prepared

by the Collector. The petitioner tendered representation to the

respondents to correct the mistake. However, no steps were taken

on the ground that, the petitioner has moved after lapse of six

months. In fact, it is the mistake on the part of the respondent

Collector in preparing E-statement and wrongly recording the

number of property. This mistake ought to have been suo motu

corrected by the Land Acquisition Officer and the Deputy Collector.

The petitioner cannot be put to blame for the mistakes those have

been committed by respondent No.2. In any case, the petitioner is

entitled to receive the amount of compensation determined by the

Land Acquisition Officer in respect of the acquired land and we

direct the respondents to pay the amount as expeditiously as

possible and preferably within a period of four months from today,

together with interest till the date of payment.

4 With the directions as above, the writ petition is disposed of.

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


 vbd