Bombay High Court
The State Of Mah vs Suklal Bhikan Rajput on 17 January, 2018
Bench: M.S. Sonak
FA 1085/03 & others
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.1085 of 2003
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Jalgaon.
2] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, III Upper Tapi Project,
Hatnur, Jalgaon, District : Jalgaon.
Appellants..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
Vijay Gajmal Marathe,
Age : 28 years, Occupation :
Agril., R/o : Chopda, Patil Gadhi.
Taluka Chopda, District : Jalgaon.
...Respondent..
(Ori.Claimant)
....
Shri K.N.Lokhande, AGP for appellants.
Shri V.B.Garud, Advocate for respondent.
-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
FIRST APPEAL NO.1086 of 2003
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Jalgaon.
2] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, III Upper Tapi Project,
Hatnur,Jalgaon, District : Jalgaon.
Appellants..
( Ori.Respondents)
Versus
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:28:41 :::
FA 1085/03 & others
- 2 -
Gulab Bandu Sutar,
Age : 32 years, Occupation :
Agril., R/o : Gujar Ali,Chopda,
Taluka Chopda, District Jalgaon.
...Respondent..
(Ori.Claimant)
....
Shri A.M.Phule, AGP for appellants.
Shri V.B.Patil, Advocate for respondent.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
FIRST APPEAL NO.1087 of 2003
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Jalgaon.
2] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, III Upper Tapi Project,
Hatnur, Jalgaon, District : Jalgaon.
Appellants..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
Suklal Bhikari Rajput,
Age : 59 years, Occupation :
Agril., R/o : Gujar Ali,
Taluka Chopda, District Jalgaon.
...Respondent..
(Ori. Claimant)
....
Shri S.P.Deshmukh, AGP for appellants.
Shri V.B.Patil, Advocate for respondent.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
FIRST APPEAL NO.1088 of 2003
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through Collector, Jalgaon.
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2018 02:28:41 :::
FA 1085/03 & others
- 3 -
2] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, III Upper Tapi Project,
Hatnur, Jalgaon, District:Jalgaon.
Appellants..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
1] Bhika Manku Patil,
Age : 30 years,
2] Vishwanath Manku Patil,
Age : 26 years, Occupation
:Both Agri.,Both R/o Gartad,
Taluka Chopda, District :
Jalgaon.
...Respondents..
(Ori.Claimants)
....
Shri K.N.Lokhande, AGP for appellants.
Shri V.B.Patil, Advocate for respondents.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
CORAM: M.S. SONAK, J.
DATE: 17.01.2018
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1] Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
They agreed that all these appeals can be disposed of by
common judgment and order since they arise out of one and
the same acquisition proceedings.
2] In all these cases, except in First Appeal
No.1088/2003, the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) has
FA 1085/03 & others
- 4 -
determined the compensation in respect of the acquired
land at Rs.340/- per Are. In First Appeal No.1088/2003,
the LAO has determined the compensation at the rate of
Rs.340/- per Are. The Reference Court has enhanced the
compensation in all the First Appeals, except First
Appeal No.1088/2003, from Rs.340/- per Are to Rs.516/-
per Are. In First Appeal No.1088/2003, the Reference
Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.516/- per Are
insofar as Jirayat lands are concerned and Rs.1032/- per
Are insofar as Bagayat lands are concerned.
3] Learned AGPs submit that there was no sufficient
evidence to order any enhancement. They submit that two
of the sale instances relied upon by the claimants i.e.
Exhibits 23 and 29 were rightly rejected by the Reference
Court. They, however, submit that the Reference Court
erred in placing reliance upon the sale instance at
Exhibit 44. Without prejudice, they submit that even the
sale instance at Exhibit 44 indicated the rate of Jirayat
land at approximately Rs.480/- per Are. They submit that
the subject matter of the sale instance at Exhibit 44
were the lands, which were better than the acquired
lands. On this basis, the learned AGPs submit that the
FA 1085/03 & others
- 5 -
Reference Court has erred in determining the rate of
Rs.516/- per Are. They submit that there was no proper
evidence that a portion of the acquired lands in First
Appeal No.1088/2003 was Bagayat land and, therefore,
there was no justification whatsoever for enhancing
compensation from Rs.340/- per Are to Rs.1032/- per Are
insofar as Bagayat lands are concerned. For all these
reasons, they submit that these First Appeals may be
allowed and the impugned awards be set aside.
4] Learned counsel for the respondents submit that
the award made by the Reference Court is in fact on a
very conservative basis. They submit that on account of
poverty and social reasons, the respondents would
themselves not institute cross-appeals or file cross-
objections. They submit that the compensation amount in
the present case is well within the limits prescribed by
the State Government itself in its Government resolution
dated 3.11.2016, which records the policy decision of the
State not to pursue the appeals of this nature. They
submit that generally, Bagayat lands are entitled to
compensation which is twice the compensation awarded in
respect of Jirayat lands. Since the awards are well
FA 1085/03 & others
- 6 -
supported by the evidence on record, they submit that
there is no case made out to interfere with the impugned
awards.
5] At the outset, a reference is required to be
made to the Government resolution dated 3.11.2016, as
amended from time to time, which records the policy
decision of the State Government that the State
Government and acquiring bodies will not institute or
pursue appeals in which enhanced compensation is less
than four times the ready reckoner rate prevalent on the
date of issue of Section 4 notification. In this case,
there is no dispute that the rate of Rs.340/- per Are, as
determined by the LAO, corresponds broadly to the ready
reckoner rate as prevalent on the date of issue of
Section 4 notification i.e. 20.3.1985. The enhanced
compensation awarded in the present case is Rs.516/- per
Are in respect of Jirayat land and portion of the Bagayat
land, which is the subject matter of First Appeal
No.1088/2003, the compensation awarded is Rs.1032/- per
Are. This means that enhanced compensation is well
within the limits prescribed in the Government resolution
dated 3.11.2016, as amended from time to time.
FA 1085/03 & others
- 7 -
6] Normally on this basis, the State Government was
required to make a statement that they will not pursue
these appeals. However, it is noticed that the learned
AGPs have considerable difficulty in obtaining
instructions not to pursue the appeals and the
difficulties are compounded if without instructions they
refrain from pursuing such appeals. In these
circumstances, the learned AGPs were permitted to argue
these appeals on merits and their contentions are now
being considered. If necessary instructions were to be
issued to the learned AGPs to act in accordance with
Government's own policy decision, as reflected in its own
Government resolution dated 3.11.2016, valuable judicial
time could have been saved. However, rather than wasting
further time by adjourning the matters to obtain
instructions and considering that these matters pertain
to the year 2003, the same are being decided on merits as
well.
7] The material on record clearly establishes that
the market rate at the time of issuance of Section 4
notification was in the range of Rs.516/- per Are insofar
as Jirayat lands are concerned. There is also a thumb
FA 1085/03 & others
- 8 -
rule that unless any evidence is produced to the
contrary, the Bagayat lands may be assessed at twice the
rate of the Jirayat lands. In this case, the Reference
Court has relied upon a sale instance in respect of Gut
No.247 from village Gartad Tq.Chopada in respect of land
admeasuring 52 Are where the consideration was
Rs.25,000/-. This sale deed is dated 22.3.1985 i.e.
almost two years prior to the date of issuance of Section
4 notification. The rate as per this sale deed comes to
approximately Rs.480/- per Are in respect of Jirayat
lands. If escalation of 10% p.a. on compound basis is to
be taken into consideration, no fault can be found with
the determination made by the Reference Court.
8] Since there is no dispute that the acquired
lands are from the neighbouring village and from the same
Taluka, there is really no infirmity in the approach of
the Reference Court in taking into consideration the sale
instance at Exhibit 44 and on such basis determining the
compensation at the rate of Rs.516/- per Are in respect
of Jirayat lands and Rs.1032/- per Are in respect of
Bagayat lands. In most of these appeals, the lands
acquired were Jirayat lands. Only a portion of the
FA 1085/03 & others
- 9 -
acquired property in First Appeal No.1088/2003 was
Bagayat land. Thus construed, there is really no reason
to interfere with the impugned awards in these first
appeals.
9] The First Appeals are dismissed. There shall be
no order as to costs.
(M.S. SONAK, J.)
ndk/c1711816.doc
