Bombay High Court
Mah. Industrial Devlp. Corp. ... vs Rizwanabai Qaizar Hussain ... on 22 May, 2017
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
1 fa922.07
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
FIRST APPEAL NO.922/2007
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation,
through its Regional Officer having its office at
Marol Industrial Estate, Andheri East, Mumbai and
having its Regional Office at By-pass Road, Amravati. ..Appellant.
..Vs..
1. Shoeb S/o Turab Ali Hassonjee,
aged about 35 Yrs., Occu. Agriculturist,
R/o Shrikrishna Peth, Amravati.
2. State of Maharashtra,
through its Collector, Amravati.
3. Special Land Acquisition Officer cum
Sub-Divisional Officer, Amravati. ..Respondents.
AND FIRST APPEAL NO.691/2008
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation,
having its office at Marol Industrial Estate,
Andheri East, Mumbai and having its Regional
Office at By-pass Road, Amravati, through its
Chief Executive Officer. ..Appellant.
..Vs..
1. Habib Khan S/o Dulekhan,
aged about Major, R/o Swardi,
Taluka and District Amravati.
2. State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Amravati.
3. Sub-Divisional Officer and Special Land
Acquisition Officer, Amravati. ..Respondents.
::: Uploaded on - 23/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2017 00:57:38 :::
2 fa922.07
AND FIRST APPEAL NO.1059/2008
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation,
through its Regional Officer having its office at
Marol Industrial Estate, Andheri East, Mumbai
and having its Regional Office at By-pass Road,
Amravati. ..Appellant.
..Vs..
1. Rizwanabai W/o Qaizar Hussain Darghahwalla,
aged about 37 Yrs., R/o Tandapeth, Bengali
Punja, Nagpur, Tq. and District Amravati.
2. State of Maharashtra,
through its Collector, Amravati.
3. Special Land Acquisition Officer cum
Sub-Divisional Officer, Amravati. ..Respondents.
AND FIRST APPEAL NO.1053/2008
Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation,
having its office at Marol Industrial Estate, Andheri
East, Mumbai and having its Regional Office at
By Pass Road, Amravati. ..Appellant.
..Vs..
1. Hajrabee W/o Sk. Amad,
aged about 40 Yrs., R/o Near Samaj Mandir,
Bichu Tekdi, Amravati.
2. State of Maharashtra,
through Collector, Amravati.
3. Special Land Acquisition Officer cum
Sub-Divisional Officer, Amravati, Tq. and
Distt. Amravati. ..Respondents.
::: Uploaded on - 23/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2017 00:57:38 :::
3 fa922.07
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shri M.M. Agnihotri, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri V.S. Giramkar, Advocate h/f Shri A.H. Lohiya & Shri S.P. Deshpande, Advocates for
respondent No.1 (land owners).
Ms. N.P. Mehta, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.2 and 3 (State of Maharashtra and Land
Acquisition Officer).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE : 22.5.2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Shri M.M. Agnihotri, Advocate for the
appellant - Development Corporation, Shri V.S. Giramkar, Advocate h/f Shri
A.H. Lohiya and Shri S.P. Deshpande, Advocates for respondent No.1 (land
owners) and Ms. N.P. Mehta, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.2 and 3 (State of
Maharashtra and Land Acquisition Officer).
2. During hearing, attention has been drawn to judgment delivered on
30th August, 2016 in First Appeal No.486/2011 by this Court. That first appeal
arose out of very same land acquisition proceedings which form subject matter
of these four appeals. Notification under Section 32(2)(1) of Maharashtra
Industrial Development Act and other relevant dates are identical.
3. It appears that initially First Appeal No.734/2008 was decided by
this Court on 15th June, 2012 accepting the rate of Rs.89,000/- per hector
granted by Reference Court. This judgment has been acted upon and applied
4 fa922.07
on 30th August, 2016 in First Appeal No.486/2011.
4. It is obvious that all these matters needed to be placed together on
15th June, 2012 when First Appeal No.734/2008 was disposed of or thereafter
on 30th August, 2016 when First Appeal No.486/2011 came to be disposed of.
5. It appears that because of administrative problems the matters could
not be placed together.
6. It needs to be mentioned that in First Appeal No.1053/2008 land
which forms subject matter is from village Talkhanda. The Land Acquisition
Officer awarded compensation of Rs.1500/- per hector only by treating the
land as uncultivable (potkharab). It has been enhanced to Rs.60,000/- per
hector by Reference Court vide its judgment dated 5th September, 2007. The
perusal of said judgment itself reveals that the concerned officer has admitted
in cross-examination that in revenue records land was not recorded as
potkharab at all. In this situation, award of compensation at Rs.1500/- per
hector i.e. at rate of 15 naya paisa per Sq. Ft. is unsustainable. The Reference
Court has awarded compensation at 60 naya paisa per Sq. Ft. This
enhancement therefore cannot be said to be exorbitant. No case is therefore
made out warranting interference.
5 fa922.07
7. In view of the fact that controversy is concluded against present
appellants by the above judgments of this Court, no interference is possible in
these matters. Accordingly all appeals are dismissed with no orders as to
costs. Rule discharged.
JUDGE
Tambaskar.
