Bombay High Court
Mango Bhanudas Patil vs Special Land Acquisition Officer 3 And ... on 30 January, 2024
2024:BHC-AUG:2167
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
908 WRIT PETITION NO. 972 OF 2024
1. Vijay Ramkrushna Patil
Age 67 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Dahigaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnur-III, Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mrs. P.R. Bharaswadkar
...
910 WRIT PETITION NO. 976 OF 2024
Baliram Vitthal Patil
Age 70 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Dahigaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnur-III, Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mrs. K.R. Jamdhade
...
912 WRIT PETITION NO. 978 OF 2024
Lalsing Hilal Patil
Age 70 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Dahigaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
2
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnur-III, Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mr. V.M. Chate
...
914 WRIT PETITION NO. 982 OF 2024
1. Vijay Ramkrushna Patil,
Age 67 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
(G.P.A. for applicant no. 2 to 4)
2. Sau. Shobhabai Premsing Patil,
Age 60 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
3. Arunabai w/o. Ramkrishna Patil
Deceased Through its legal heir 1,2 & 4
4. Shri. Vilas Ramkrishana Patil,
Age 57 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
All R/o. Dahigaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioners
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnur-III, Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division, Jalgaon.
Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mrs. P.R. Bharaswadkar
...
917 WRIT PETITION NO. 1005 OF 2024
1. Ramchandra Nawalsing Patil
Age 57 yrs, Occu. Agri. & household,
R/o. Warsade (Pra. bo), Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon.
2. Rajaram Nawalsing Patil,
Age 55 yrs., Occu. Agri. & household,
R/o. Warsade (Pra. bo), Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioners
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
3
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer-3,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnoor Class,
Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Bahula Medium Project, Jalgaon.
3. Bank of Baroda, Branch Nandra,
Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon.
4. Varsade,
Pra. Bo. Vi. Ka. Society, Jalgaon.
5. Maharana Pratap Nagari Sahakari
Patsantha, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mr. V.M. Chate
...
922 WRIT PETITION NO. 1033 OF 2024
Mango Bhanudas Patil
Age 67 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Warsade (Pra. bo), Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer-3,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnoor Class
2. Executive Engineer,
Bahula Medium Project, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mrs. K.R. Jamdhade
...
924 WRIT PETITION NO. 1036 OF 2024
Mango Bhanudas Patil
Age 67 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Warsade (Pra. bo), Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
4
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer-3,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnoor Class
2. Executive Engineer,
Bahula Medium Project, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mrs. K.R. Jamdhade
...
926 WRIT PETITION NO. 1097 OF 2024
Nivrutti Mukhtyarsing Patil
Age 65 yrs, Occu. Agri.,
R/o. Dahigaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Uppar Tapi Project Hatnur-III, Jalgaon.
2. Executive Engineer,
Medium Project Division, Jalgaon. .....Respondents
.....
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh h/f. Mr. K.M. More
AGP for Respondents : Mr. V.M. Chate
...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : January 30, 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally.
2. Heard the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respective
parties.
3. The learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the Reference
Court dismissed the reference on account of the fact that the petitioners
failed to lead evidence before the Reference Court. The learned Advocate for
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
the petitioners submits that the reference application was filed before the
Collector and the matter was referred to the Reference Court. However, the
petitioners were not aware of the further proceedings, and as such, no steps
were taken by them to lead evidence before the Reference Court. He relies
upon the Judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.12795 of 2019 (Walmik
s/o. Trimbak Tupe Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.)and other
connected matters dated 17/01/2020, and submits that the Reference Court
should decide the Reference Application on merits and not by taking into
consideration the evidence available before the Special Land Acquisition
Officer. He further submits that in identical fact situation, in Writ Petition
No. 210/2024 (Sanjay s/o. Ashok Mitkari Vs. The State of Maharashtra &
Ors.) and other connected matter, this Court by judgment and order dated
9.1.2024, has remanded matter for leading evidence before the Reference
Court.
4. The learned AGP has not seriously disputed the legal proposition
canvassed, however, submits that there is a huge delay in filing the writ
petition and that on account of delay the petition be dismissed or a
conditional order be passed.
5. In view of the submission canvassed by the learned AGP, the learned
Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would
not claim the interest or statutory benefits for the delay period from the
date of the Reference Court order till date of filing of the writ petition.
6. In view of the submissions made, the award passed by the Reference
WP No. 972/24 & Ors.
Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Reference Court for
deciding the Reference on merits.
7. The petitioners are permitted to lead evidence before the Reference
Court.
8. The learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that he would
appear before the Reference Court on 05/02/2024 and that he would also
tender his evidence before the Reference Court on the date given by the
Reference Court.
9. The Reference Court to decide the Reference expeditiously. However,
it is made clear that in the event the Reference is answered in favour of the
petitioner, the petitioner would not be entitled for interest or statutory
benefits for the delay period from the date of the impugned order of the
Reference Court till the date of the filing of the present writ petitions.
10. In view of the above, both the writ petitions are allowed.
Rule made absolute in above terms.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER J.]
SSC/
