Bombay High Court
Parmeshwar Ramchandra Kachare vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr ... on 25 October, 2021
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
Ref.WP.2040.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.2040 OF 2021
PRAKASH KHANDU KACHRE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. K.B. Jadhavar
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2043 OF 2021
VENKATI ANKUSH BHAGNURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.N. Kutti
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2051 OF 2021
GANPATI SATWA WAGHMARE AND ORS.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR BEED AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.N. Kutti
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2053 OF 2021
PARMESHWAR RAMCHANDRA KACHRE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR NANDED AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.N. Kutti
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2054 OF 2021
RAMCHANDRA KONDIBA KACHARE
1/3
::: Uploaded on - 26/10/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 27/10/2021 03:58:48 :::
Ref.WP.2040.21.odt
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.N. Kutti
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2056 OF 2021
GOPAL BALAJI BHAGNURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. K.B. Jadhavar
...
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.2081 OF 2021
RAMESHWAR SHIVAJI BHAGNURE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shivsamb N. Janakwade
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. K.B. Jadhavar
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 25.10.2021
PER COURT :
The Writ Petitions are not on board. Taken on board on
mentioning.
2. Heard the learned advocate Mr. Janakwade for the petitioners
and the learned AGP for the respondent State. The respondent No. 3 has
been duly served with the notice indicating that the matter would be heard
finally at the stage of admission. But still it has not appeared. The
petitioners are aggrieved by the dismissal of their respective references
under the Land Acquisition Act preferred under Section 18 by the reference
courts in default of prosecution.
Ref.WP.2040.21.odt
3. It is trite that being a reference under Section 18 of the Land
Acquisition Act, it is imperative for the reference court to decide it on merits.
It is not expected of it to merely act as an umpire overlooking the matter. It
is not expected that a reference is simply dismissed in default, may be for
the lapses on the part of the claimant petition. He could have independently
examined the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer objectively. He
has simply dismissed it for failure of the petitioners to lead evidence. This is
not a correct approach. This court in number of cases has taken a specific
stand and has remanded the matters to the reference courts for decision
afresh on merits by putting the petitioners to certain conditions.
4. The Writ Petitions are allowed. The impugned judgments and
orders are quashed and set aside. The references are remitted back to the
reference courts for decision afresh on their own merits. The petitioners
shall appear before the concerned reference courts on 15.11.2021. There
shall be no need for the reference courts to issue any notice to them.
5. The petitioners shall tender their affidavit in lieu of examination
in chief on the date of their appearance. The reference court thereafter shall
proceed to conduct necessary hearing and decide the reference as early as
possible.
6. However, the petitioners shall not be entitled to any interest
from the date of dismissal of their respective references till 15.11.2021.
(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)
habeeb
