Bombay High Court
Prof. Prabhakar Kashinath Shende ... vs Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation ... on 16 August, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 1608wp984.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Cri. Writ Petition No.984 of 2016
(Prof. Prabhakar Kashinath Shende & others -vs.- Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., thr. its
G.M. & others)
______________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's orders
Mr. R.D. Dhande, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. K. Deogade, Advocate for Respondent Nos.5, 8 to 10
12 & 13.
Mr. S.N. Tapadiya holding for Shri V.V. Bhangde for
Respondent No.2.
Mr. S.M. Ukey, Addl.P.P. for Respondent No.1.
CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &
MANISH PITALE, JJ.
DATE : 16.08.2017.
By this writ petition the petitioners have made
diverse prayers seeking reliefs regarding compensation for
alleged illegal detention and alleged illegal demolition of
building of land Survey No.70, situated at Parsodi,
Grampanchayat Khapri (Railway), Tah. Nagpur (Rural), Dist.
Nagpur. It is an admitted position that the aforesaid land
was subject matter of Land Acquisition Proceeding under the
provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award
was passed on 16.02.2009 in respect of the same. It is also
an admitted position that none of the petitioners raised any
2 1608wp984.16.odt
grievance against the said award and that it became final.
2. Perusal of record also shows that the authorities
took possession of the land on 09.02.2015 in pursuance of
the said award under Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894. Upon possession being taken, land has vested
absolutely in the State Government.
3. It is further noted that the petitioners had
approached this Court by way of W.P. No.1358/2016 by
challenging the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition
Officer, in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. By
an order dated 03.05.2016 the said Writ Petition was
dismissed by this Court. The following extract of the said
order is relevant for the present petition :-
"On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties
and on a perusal of the provisions of Section
24(2) of the Act and the affidavit-in-reply filed
on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3, it appears
that the relief sought by the petitioners cannot be
granted. It is the case of the petitioners that the
petitioners have not received the compensation
towards the acquisition of the land till date. The
respondent nos.1 to 3 have deposited the
compensation in the Court, as required by the
provisions of Section 31 of the Land Acquisition
3 1608wp984.16.odt
Act, 1894. In compliance with the provisions of
Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, the
amount of compensation is deposited by the State
Government before the Civil Judge (Senior
Division), Nagpur on 10.1.2011 in Land
Acquisition Case No.18/2011 since the
petitioners refused to accept the compensation.
After the respondents have deposited the amount
in the reference Court in view of the failure on
the part of the petitioners to receive the same, the
provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act cannot be
invoked. Also, we find on a perusal of the
original record and proceedings that the
possession of the land is secured by the
respondents on 9.2.2015. The possession receipt
shows that the petitioners were not ready to
handover the possession of the land to the
respondents and hence, the respondents secured
the possession of the land in the presence of the
Panchas, the Deputy Collector and the Mandal
Adhikari.
Since both the grounds on which the
petitioners have challenged the award in view of
the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act of
2013 are baseless as we find that the possession
of the land was secured by the respondents before
the filing of the writ petition and the
compensation was also deposited in the reference
Court, in view of Section 31 of the Land
Acquisition Act in the year 2011, the writ
petition is dismissed with no order as to costs."
4. This order was challenged by the petitioners
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing Special Leave
Petition No.15882/2016. By an order dated 11.07.2016 the
Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted the petitioners to withdraw
the special leave petition with liberty to approach this Court
by way of Review Petition.
4 1608wp984.16.odt
5. Thereafter, by order dated 02.09.2016 the review
application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. It is further
submitted that against the order dated 02.09.2016 in review
application, the petitioners filed Special Leave Petition before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which was withdrawn.
Therefore, the order dated 03.05.2016 passed by this Court
in Writ Petition No.1358/2016 attained finality. The
observations made by this Court in the said order dated
03.05.2016 regarding taking over of possession on
09.02.2015 by the respondent have attained finality. As
stated above, once the possession of the land has been taken
over it is absolutely vests in the State Government.
6. In view of the above, the prayers in the present
writ petition cannot be granted because all of them pertain to
allegations regarding demolition of the building standing on
the land in question after the possession was taken over. The
prayer regarding initiation of criminal proceeding against the
respondent for alleged high handedness can be taken care of,
by the private complaint already filed by the petitioners
before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur,
bearing Criminal Application No.493/2016. As a result, no
5 1608wp984.16.odt
grievance of the petitioners survives in this petition, and
hence, it is dismissed.
JUDGE JUDGE
waghmare
