Ghaleppa Annappa Alias Annarao ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15547 Bom

                                     1             967-wp 12130-2021.odt



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         WRIT PETITION NO. 12130 OF 2021

 Ghaleppa Annappa @ Annarao Birajdar
 (Died) Through its L.Rs.
 Shrimati Sarubai Ghaleppa Birajdar                             .. Petitioner

          Versus

 The State of Maharashtra and others                            .. Respondents

 Mr. Santosh N. Patne, Advocate for the Petitioner.
 Mr. S. P. Tiwari, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

                               CORAM :   S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                         R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATED : 28th October, 2021.

PER COURT:-

. At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner leave to

correct respondent No. 2 is granted.

2. The application filed by the petitioner under Section 28-A of the

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1894') is

rejected on the ground that the acquiring body has filed an appeal

against the judgment of the Reference Court passed under Section 18

of the Act of 1894 and relied by the petitioner for an application under

Section 28-A of the Act of 1894.

                                                                             1 of 2





                                     2                967-wp 12130-2021.odt

3. The learned A.G.P. accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

4. The respondent No. 2 certainly could not have decided the

application under Section 28-A of the Act of 1894 as the appeal is

pending and if the interim orders are passed in it, however, ought not

to have rejected the application but should have kept it pending till the

appeal filed by the acquiring body is decided.

5. In the light of that, impugned order is quashed and set aside. The

application filed by the petitioner is restored to its original position

before the respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 2 shall decide the said

application depending upon the orders that may be passed by the High

Court in appeal filed by the acquiring body.

6. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

 ( R. N. LADDHA )                               ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA )
      JUDGE                                               JUDGE




 P.S.B.




                                                                               2 of 2