Godavari Marathwada Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal vs State of Maharashtra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2008 Supreme(Bom) 1506

Mh. L.J. 2009 (1) 883
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND S.A, BOBDE, J.
Godavari Marathwada Patbandhare Vikas Mahamandal - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondents.
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 310 OF 2008
ALONG WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NOS. 311/2008, 312/2008, 313/2008,
314/2008, 315/2008, 316/2008, 317/2008, 318/2008, 319/2008,
320/2008, 321/2008, 322/2008, 323/2008, 324/2008,
325/2008, 326/2008 AND 327/2008
AND
CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.143/2006, 145/2006, 147/2006,
149/2006, 151/2006, 153/2006, 155/2006, 157/2006,
159/2006, 160/2006, 163/2006, 165/2006, 167/2006,
169/2006, 171/2006, 177/2006, 172/2006 and 175/2006.
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.310 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7654 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2006
ALONG WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 311 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7770 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 312 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7643 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 147 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 313 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7727 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 149 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 314 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7769 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 151 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 315 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7788 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 153 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.316 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7804 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 155 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 317 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7790 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 157 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 318 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7805 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 159 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 319 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7701 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 160 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 320 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 8876 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 163 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 321 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7953 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 165 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 322 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7700 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 167 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 323 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 8470 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 169 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 324 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 8471 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 171 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 325 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7791 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 177 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 326 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7806 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 172 OF 2006
WITH
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2008
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 7699 OF 2004
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 175 OF 2006
DECIDED ON : 16TH OCTOBER 2008

Headnote:(a)Land Acquisition Act, SS. 18, 28-A, 3(b) and 9:- Impleadment of beneficiaries in the land acquisition proceedings for enhancement of compensation - Corporate bodies to which the acquired land is allotted are necessary parties in the proceedings for enhancement of the compensation for land acquisition. - The contention tht they came into existence after the notification for land acquisition is issued is not relevant - Their impleadment petitions were allowed
(b)Land Acquisition Act, S. 28-A - Proceedings under Section 28A are Redetermination proceedings by claimant - Scheme of the proceedings on the application of claimants for higher compensation on par with the compensation awrded to other owner of land by competent court, the Collector shall examine the evidence on record after giving notice to the interested parties and make appropriate award.
(c) Land Acquisition Act, S. 3(b) :- Meaning of the word “Persons interested” - All persons having an interest in the property and are entitled to compensation on acquisition of the land including easement holders are covered by the expression

JUDGMENT (PER SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J.)

Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, a statutory body established under the provisions of Maharashtra Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Act No. 23 of 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the “Corporation”) has filed the present Appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the Order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 29th November 2005 dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Corporation praying for setting aside of the Award made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Nashik (hereinafter referred to as the “SLAO”) in case of Proposal No. 30 of 1982 dated 20th September 2003 passed under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In the Writ Petition, the Corporation had also prayed in the alternative that if the application of the Claimant, Respondent No.2, is found to be within limitation, then the matter be remanded back to the Collector for disposal on merits after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Corporation.

2. The facts giving rise to the present Appeal fall in a very narrow compass. The Appropriate Government issued a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) which was published on 31st March 1983. In furtherance to this Notification, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 31st October 1985. The lands were acquired from the land owners and possession thereafter was taken on 10th December 1985. The SLAO made his Award on 30th November 1987 under Section 11 of the Act. The Award of the Collector was challenged by the Claimants by filing Petitions under Section 18 of the Act. These References were referred by the SLAO to the Court of competent jurisdiction. The Joint District Judge, Nashik, vide his judgment dated 7th April 1995 passed in Land Reference No.500 of 1989 enhancing the compensation payable to the Claimants at the rate of Rs.24,000/- to Rs.40,000/-.

3. Some of the Claimants who had not preferred References under Section 18 of the Act filed Petitions before the SLAO under Section 28A of the Act. These very Claimants had even filed a Writ Petition being Writ Petition No. 1270 of 2002 which was decided by this Court vide its Order dated 3rd May 2002 requiring the Government to hear the Petitions in accordance with law. The Writ Petition was disposed of with direction to decide the Application under Section 28A of the Act within six months. The Applications filed by the Petitioners under Section 28A of the Act were finally disposed of by the SLAO vide judgment dated 20th September 2003 enhancing the compensation and placing the Claimants at parity with the judgment of the Joint District Judge, Nashik dated 7th April 1995.

4. Aggrieved by the Award of the SLAO dated 20th September 2003, the Corporation preferred Writ Petitions before this Court which came to be dismissed vide Order dated 29th November 2005 giving rise to the present Appeals. The Corporation had filed different Writ Petitions i.e. 18 against different Claimants. Separate Appeals have been filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in each of those Writ Petitions. Thus, by this Judgment, we will dispose of the 18 Appeals preferred by the Corporation challenging the correctness and legality of the Order of the learned Single Judge dated 29th November 2005.

5. Writ Petitions filed by the Corporation were primarily dismissed by the learned Single Judge on a very short ground. It will be useful to refer to the relevant part of the impugned judgment. The same reads as under :-

“The possession of the land was taken by the government on 10.12.85 and an award has been declared by the SLAO on 30.10.87. Thereafter reference was made by some of the affected persons u/s. 18 and the same was decided by the Civil Court by passing an order and judgment on 7.4.95. Admittedly, the petitioner has come into existence only on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document