Sunita Digambar Desale And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11573 Bom

                                                                  7336.18wp
                                  (1)

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    10 WRIT PETITION NO.7336 OF 2018

                 ANANT SHANKARRAO KORKE
                          VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                  AND
                    10 WRIT PETITION NO.7338 OF 2018

            BABULAL PAULAD VANJARI AND OTHERS
                           VERUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                  AND
                    10 WRIT PETITION NO.7339 OF 2018

                    PRAVIN SUDAM PATIL
                          VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                  AND
                    12 WRIT PETITION NO.8883 OF 2018

                 GORAKH DIGAMBAR PAGARE
                          VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                                  AND
                    13 WRIT PETITION NO.8931 OF 2018

       SUNITA DIGAMBAR DESALE AND ANOTHER
                            VERSUS
       THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                ...
 Mr A. B. Kale, Advocate for petitioners;
 Mr S. G. Sangle, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 4;
 Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for respondent No.2;
 Mr D. G. Nagode, Standing Counsel for respondent No.3




::: Uploaded on - 24/08/2021              ::: Downloaded on - 25/08/2021 04:13:30 :::
                                                                            7336.18wp
                                         (2)

                                   CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
                                                  AND
                                           S. G. MEHARE, JJ.

DATE : 23rd August, 2021

PER COURT:

1. During the course of hearing of these matters, the learned Advocate for the petitioners points out that in several cases, Corrigendum has been issued by the SLAO and the acquiring authority has implemented the Corrigendum and paid compensation amounts to the agriculturists. It is, in these cases of the petitioners, that the said authority is taking a stand that a Corrigendum cannot be issued by the SLAO. Reliance is placed on the judgment dated 20/12/2019, delivered by this Court in Writ Petition No.5286/2018 filed by Bhupendrasingh Sardarsingh Parmar versus the Competent Authority and others.

2. Mr Kale, the learned Advocate for the petitioners prays for time to place before the Court a list of such Corrigendum awards, which have been implemented by the acquiring body, whereas the petitioners are suffering denial of payment.

3. At the request of the petitioners, stand over to 21/09/2021.

(S. G. MEHARE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

sjk