Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT NAGPUR
ANOOP V. MOHTA & A.R. JOSHI, JJ.
Zama Gotya Jadhav (since deceased) & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1325 of 1999
Decided On : 06-01-2015
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Fair Opportunity for Enhancement of Compensation
Fact of the Case:
The court found that the petitioners were not given the opportunity of hearing as required under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for determining the enhanced amount of compensation based on the Award passed.
Finding of the Court:
The court quashed and set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matters for reconsideration, emphasizing the necessity of fair opportunity for the petitioners to present their claim for enhancement of compensation.
Issues: Failure to provide fair opportunity for enhancement of compensation under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement of fair and equal opportunity for all persons affected to apply for enhancement of compensation under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and directed the concerned respondents to reconsider the case and pass the order within three months.
Final Decision: The impugned orders were quashed and set aside, and the matters were remanded for reconsideration with the directive to provide fair opportunity for the petitioners to present their claim for enhancement of compensation.
(Anoop V. Mohta, J.)
1. The matter is called out from final hearing board. Heard finally.
2. We are inclined to dispose of present writ petition, as after hearing and after going through the documents and the material place on record, we have also noticed that no opportunity of hearing and or personal hearing, as contemplated under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was given to the petitioners to determine the enhanced amount of compensation on the basis of the Award passed. Section 28A contemplate s and entitles the owner or person concerned to apply for an enhancement of compensation. The concerned authority is, therefore, required to consider the same in accordance with law which includes fair and equal opportunity to all the persons affected. Otherwise also, it is necessary as for effective determination/inquiry means fair opportunity, so that the concerned person/s can place all relevant materials in support their claim of enhancement of compensation.
3. The issue with regard to the enhanced claim of compensation, just cannot be decided in such a fashion without giving fair opportunity to the petitioners-owners. Therefore, without expressing anything on merit, at this stage, as no opportunity was given to the petitioner which is a mandate of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, we are inclined to quash and set aside the impugned order by keeping all points open and direct the concerned respondents to reconsider the case/application filed by the petitioners by giving all opportunities as contemplated and pass the order as early as possible preferably within three months. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
[a] All the impugned orders dated 28.2.1994 are quashed and set aside.
[b] The matters are remanded for reconsideration in accordance with law and to be decided as early as possible preferably within a period of three months.
[c] Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
