Amruta Dagadu Lahamge And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 1882 Bom

                                                                   wp11956&2.odt
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                        WRIT PETITION NO. 11953 OF 2016

1.      Amruta Dagadu Lahamge                             
        Age 85 years, Occu:Agri

2.      Datta Amruta Lahamge,                   ... Petitioners 
        Age 37 years, Occu:Agri
        Both R/o Rajur Tq. Akole
        Dist. Ahmednagar
                           WRIT PETITION NO. 12023 OF 2016
        Kisan Dhawla Rawate                     ...  Petitioner 
        Age 75 years, Occu: Agri.
        R/o Rajur, Tq. Akole,
        Dist. Ahmednagar
                           WRIT PETITION NO. 11956 OF 2016
1.      Shantaram Nana Pandit (died)
        Through legal heirs.


1-A Ganesh Shangaram Pandit
    Age 50 years, Occu: Agri

1-B Yinayak Shantaram Pandit                    ...  Respondents
    Age 37 years, Occu: Agri
    Both R/o Rajur Tq. Akoli
    Dist. Ahmednagar

        VERSUS

1.  The State of Maharashtra,
    Through its Secretary,
    Revenue & Forest Department,
    Mantralaya, Mumbai 32

2.      The Additional Commissioner,
        Nashik Division, Nashik

3.      The Collector, Ahmednagar,              ...        Respondents.
        Dist. Ahmednagar

4.      The Land Acquisition Officer 
        No.13, Ahmednagar, 

                                                                                    1/6


     ::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2017              ::: Downloaded on - 28/08/2017 00:06:37 :::
                                                                       wp11956&2.odt
5.      The Executive  Engineer,                   ...  Respondents in 
        Uppar Pravara Dam Division,                     all the 
        Sangamner (Ghulewadi)                           matters.
        Tq. Sangamner, Dist. 
        Ahmednagar

Mr. S. K. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioners
Mr.   A.   R.   Kale,   Mrs.   M.   A.   Deshpande   and   Mr.   S.   B. 
Joshi,   AGPs   for   Respondents   1   to   4   State   in   the 
respective petitions. 
Mr. B. R. Survase, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 in all 
the matters.

                                    CORAM   :  R. M. BORDE & 
                                                K. L. WADANE, JJ.
                                     DATE   :   20th April, 2017

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

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. With the consent of the parties, taken up for

final disposal at the admission stage.

3. The petitioners are praying for quashment of

acquisition proceedings and final awards passed on

20.03.1987 and 24.01.92 in respective petitions. The

land belonging to the petitioners have been acquired

for Nilwande Dam-2. It is stated that though the awards

were declared and the petitioners were paid amount of

compensation, however, the possession of the acquired

property has not be taken over by the acquiring body.

The petitioners as such, contend that in view of

operation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair

wp11956&2.odt Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the

proceedings in respect of acquisition initiated under

the Land Acquisition Act 1894 shall be deemed to have

lapsed. The petitioners have also expressed their

willingness to refund the amount of compensation

received by them with interest @ 6% per annum from the

date of receipt of such amount till the date of

repayment.

4. In response to the notice issued by this

Court, the acquiring body has caused appearance and

presented affidavit in reply. It is stated in the

affidavit in reply that due to change in alignment of

Nilwande Dam, the acquired lands cannot be utilized for

the project. It is specifically contended that the

acquired lands cannot be used for the purpose for which

those were acquired. It is further stated that since

there is a proposal for handing over the possession of

the land in favour of one Government Industrial

Institution, Rajur, request made by the petitioners

cannot be considered. It is also further stated that

the State Government has not communicated anything in

this regard. The acquiring body has expressed

willingness to relinquish the lands on refund of amount

wp11956&2.odt of compensation together with interest as may be

prescribed by the High Court.

5. It is pointed by the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners that the Industrial Training

Institute has already acquired some other property and

the Institute has been established at village Rajur

Taluka Akole and as such, the purpose for which the

land is stated to have been reserved also does not

remain relevant.

6. The contention of the petitioners, relying upon

provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, deserves

favourable consideration. Section 24 of the Act of 2013

reads as under:

"24. Land acquisition process under Act No. 1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases.-

(1) ......

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act:

wp11956&2.odt Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been accepted, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act."

7. It is not a matter of dispute that award has

been passed in the matter five years prior to the

enforcement of the Act, 2013 and physical possession of

the land is still with the petitioners and has not been

taken over by the acquiring body. In this view of the

matter, proceedings in respect of acquisition initiated

under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 shall be deemed to

have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so

chooses, have an option to initiate the proceedings of

such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the

provisions of the Act of 2013. As has been recorded

above, the petitioners have expressed their willingness

to refund the amount of compensation received by them

together with interest @6 per annum from the date of

receipt of the amount. The petitioners, as such, shall

repay the amount as specified above to the acquiring

body within a period of three months from today. The

proceedings of acquisition and the award declared on

20.03.1987 and 24.01.92 under the Land Acquisition Act,

wp11956&2.odt 1894, to the extent of petitioners, shall stand lapsed.

8. Rule is made absolute accordingly to the extent

as specified above. Writ petitions disposed of. In the

facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no

order as to costs.

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


JPC