[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Executive Engineer -2 Medium ... vs Ashok Devchand Chambhar And Others on 9 May, 2026
16-29.odt
IN THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT PRESIDED OVER BY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT B. KADETHANKAR,
HELD ON 09th MAY, 2026,
AT HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Organized by the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad
under Section 19, of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Central Act)
16 FIRST APPEAL NO. 781 OF 2013
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION
VERSUS
DEVIDAS SINDHUJI GAWLI AND ANOTHER
...
17 FIRST APPEAL NO. 784 OF 2013
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11414 OF 2024
IN FA/784/2013
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6134 OF 2014
IN FA/784/2013
18 FIRST APPEAL NO. 785 OF 2013
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7350 OF 2025
IN FA/785/2013
19 FIRST APPEAL NO. 786 OF 2013
20 FIRST APPEAL NO. 787 OF 2013
21 FIRST APPEAL NO. 789 OF 2013
22 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3081 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3079 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2130 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3075 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3080 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3076 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 3077 OF 2013
23 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1612 OF 2014
SVH 1
16-29.odt
24 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2687 OF 2015
25 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2469 OF 2016
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3304 OF 2025
IN FA/2469/2016
26 FIRST APPEAL NO. 722 OF 2017
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 724 OF 2017
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 726 OF 2017
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 725 OF 2017
27 FIRST APPEAL NO. 992 OF 2025
28 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1476 OF 2025
29 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16409 OF 2015
IN FAST/11353/2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16411 OF 2015
IN FAST/11778/2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16413 OF 2015
IN FAST/11774/2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16414 OF 2015
IN FAST/11782/2015
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16412 OF 2015
IN FAST/11776/2015
Mr. Chetan Jadhav, Advocate a/w Ms. Kavita Bhale, Advocate for
Appellant
Mr. S. P. Salgar, Advocate h/f Mr. Anant R. Devakate, Advocate for
Respondent
ORDER
(09th May, 2026)
1. The dispute between the parties is referred for
determination to the Lok Adalat.
16-29.odt
2. When the matters were called upon, the learned
Secretary of the High Court Legal Services, Sub-Committee
produced on record a scanned copy of communication dated
08/05/2026 under the signature of one V. M. Kotecha, Sub-Divisional
Officer, Tapi Irrigation Development Corporation, Jalgaon addressed
to him. In the said letter it is stated that the concerned office is
already facing a financial deficit to deposit an amount of
Rs.76,796.54090/- Lakhs in this Court pursuant to the last orders
passed by the Court and the National Lok Adalat. It is further stated
that the funds approved to the Corporation for the financial year
2026-27 are insufficient to meet the payments of enhanced
compensation in the pending matters. Under these circumstances, if
any matter of the Corporation is placed before the Lok Adalat for
settlement, then that would result into additional financial liability
on the Corporation. Citing this reason, the concerned Sub-Divisional
Officer concludes that it would not be possible for the Corporation to
participate in any settlement proceedings in today's National Lok
Adalat.
3. From the record it appears that the intimation of
settlement proposals were received from claimants' side for placing
the matters before today's Lok Adalat and the same were sent to
the Dhule Office of the Corporation. In turn, the Dhule Office seems
to have informed the Jalgaon Office. Be that as it may. We are of the
16-29.odt
opinion that this is a National Lok Adalat and participation of the
public bodies in such Lok Adalat should be a meaningful and
wholeheartedly participation. It is not the case that the concerned
Officer has cited any reason on the ground of inability of the
Corporation to meet the settlement terms on merit.
4. We deprecate the approach and attitude of the
concerned Sub-Divisional Officer, who happened to be the
responsible officer of Tapi Irrigation Development Corporation,
Jalgaon, whereby a mere intimation that too hardly a day before the
Lok Adalat is sent by him on 08/05/2026 to the Secretary of High
Court Legal Services, Sub-Committee. It was incumbent on the part
of such authority of the Corporation to keep a responsible officer
present in the Lok Adalat to mention the bona fide reason for not
meeting any settlement proposal came before the Lok Adalat. We
have noted that even the learned advocates representing the
Corporation are unable to address on the settlement terms for want
of instructions. No words are needed to note that this is absolutely
an irresponsible approach of the responsible authority and we
deprecate the same.
5. Learned advocates Mr. Chetan Jadhav and Ms. Kavita
Bhale representing the Corporation request that these matters be
kept before the next Lok Adalat and they will pursue the authorities
and take instructions in respect of settlement.
16-29.odt
6. We appreciate the statement made by the learned
advocates for the Corporation. However, we record that if such
approach of the concerned authority is noticed further, appropriate
orders will be passed.
7. List these matters on the next Lok Adalat.
8. Copy of this order be sent to the Executive Director of
Tapi Irrigation Development Corporation and the Chief Secretary of
the Irrigation Department, State of Maharashtra.
9. Needless to mention that on the next Lok Adalat, the
Corporation shall keep it's responsible officer present in the Lok
Adalat to assist the learned advocate representing them.
(A. R. Borulkar) (Kishor R. Choudhari) (AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.)
Advocate, D.J. (Retd.) Head of the Panel
Member Member
(Seal of the Authority/Committee)
