Bombay High Court
The State Of Mah vs Narayan Hilal Patil on 17 January, 2018
Bench: M.S. Sonak
FA 784/05 & others
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO.784 of 2005
1] The Special Land Acqusition Officer,
Upper Tapi Project (Hatnur) No.2,
Jalgaon.
2] The Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division,
District : Jalgaon.
..Appellant
s
..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
Narayan Hilal Patil,
Age : 30 years, Occupation :
Agril, R/o Khadke Khurd,
Taluka Erandol, District : Jalgaon.
..Respondent..
(Ori.Claimant)
-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
FIRST APPEAL NO.785 of 2005
1] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Upper Tapi Project
(Hatnur) No.2, Jalgaon.
2] The Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division,
District : Jalgaon. Appellant
s
..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
Deosing Nanu Patil,
Age : 60 years, Occupation :
Agril., R/o : Khadke Khurd,
Taluka Erandol, District Jalgaon.
...Respondent..
(Ori.Claimant)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 23/01/2018 01:25:03 :::
FA 784/05 & others
- 2 -
FIRST APPEAL NO.786 of 2005
1] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Upper Tapi Project
(Hatnur) No.2, Jalgaon.
2] The Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division,
District : Jalgaon. Appellant
s
..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
Rajaram Onkar Patil,
Age : 55 years, Occupation :
Agril., R/o : Erandol,
District : Jalgaon.
...Respondent..
(Ori.Claimant)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
FIRST APPEAL NO.787 of 2005
1] The Special Land Acquisition
Officer, Upper Tapi Project
(Hatnur) No.2, Jalgaon.
2] The Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division,
District : Jalgaon. Appellant
s
..
(Ori.Respondents)
Versus
1] Narsing Baburao Patil,
Age : 58 years,
2] Raghnath Baburao Patil,
Age : 50 years,
Both : Agriculturists,
R/o : Khadke Khurd,
Taluka Erandol,
District : Jalgaon.
...Respondent
s
..
(Ori.Claimants)
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 23/01/2018 01:25:03 :::
FA 784/05 & others
- 3 -
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Shri A.M. Phule, AGP for appellants.
None present for respondents, though served.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
CORAM: M.S. SONAK, J.
DATE: 17.01.2018
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1] Heard learned AGP for the appellants in each of
these appeals. The respondents, though served, are
neither present nor represented.
2] In each of these appeals, challenge is to the
judgment and award dated 24.12.2004 made by the Reference
Court determining the compensation at the rate of
Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare for Pot Kharab lands;
Rs.2,00,000/- per Hectare for Jirayat land and
Rs.4,00,000/- per Hectare for Bagayat land. The SLAO has
awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.61,500/- per
Hectare in respect of the acquired lands.
3] The learned AGP submits that the enhancement
granted by the Reference Court is excessive and in any
case not supported by the evidence on record. He submits
that since the LAO has determined compensation on uniform
FA 784/05 & others
- 4 -
basis, the Reference Court was not justified in
determining separate rates in respect of Pot Kharab,
Jirayat and Bagayat lands. On these grounds, the learned
AGP submits that the impugned awards are liable to be set
aside.
4] From the perusal of the evidence on record, it
is clear that the Reference Court has relied upon sale
deed dated 3.4.1996, which was in respect of dry land and
from which, it is evident that the market rate in respect
of dry land in the locality was in the range of
Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare. The Reference Court has also
relied upon the award in LAR No.456/1999 again in
relation to comparable lands where the rate awarded is
identical to the rate now awarded by the Reference Court
in the impugned awards.
5] The Reference Court was entirely justified in
relying upon the evidence led on behalf of the claimants
and on the said basis, making a distinction between the
Pot Kharab lands, the Jirayat lands and the Bagayat
lands. The LAO has in fact erred in treating all the
lands similar when in fact they were not. The LAO has
awarded similar compensation to Pot Kharat, Jirayat and
FA 784/05 & others
- 5 -
Bagayat lands, which was obviously incorrect. The
Reference Court, relying upon the material on record, has
rightly made a distinction and has proportionately
determined the market price. There is no error in the
exercise undertaken by the Reference Court.
6] The acquisition in the present case relates to
Anjani Medium Project at village Khadke Khurd Tq.Erandol
Dist.Jalgaon. In the adjacent Taluka, the Government
vide Section 4 notification dated 21.8.1997, has acquired
several lands for Waghur Project in respect of the land
so acquired. The Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Special Land Acquisition Officer (III), Jalgaon &
another v. Bhagwat Vithal Sonwane (2009 (4) Mh.L.J.,
308), has determined compensation at the rate of
Rs.1,00,000/- per Hectare for Pot Kharab lands,
Rs.2,00,000/- per Hectare for Jirayat lands and
Rs.4,00,000/- per Hectare for Bagayat lands. In the
present case, the acquisition proceedings commenced vide
Section 4 notification dated 18.12.1997 i.e. hardly four
months after the date of issuance of Section 4
notification for acquisition of lands for Waghur Project.
The impugned awards in the present case are also
FA 784/05 & others
- 6 -
consistent with the determination made in the case of
lands acquired for Waghur Project, which determination
has been duly affirmed by this Court in the case of
Bhagwat Vithal Sonwane (supra). This is an additional
reason for not interfering with the impugned awards.
7] For the aforesaid reasons, these appeals are
dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(M.S. SONAK, J.)
ndk/c1711826.odt
