1. Heard. By consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner challenges the action taken by the Respondent thereby deducting 10% amount from the compensation payable in respect of the land on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017 issued by the State Government.

3. In the present proceedings, the Petitioner’s land was acquired by the State Government by issuing Notification under section4 of the said Act. Thereafter the individual notices were issued along with the Notification under section 6 of the said Act. Thereafter the Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed the Award under section 11 of the said Act. That was accepted by the Petitioner without filing any Reference under section 18 of the said Act. Thereafter the Petitioner had made an Application under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (said Act) for redetermination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the Award passed by the Court in another matter arising from the same Notification under section4 of the said Act. That Application was decided by the Land Acquisition Officer and passed the Award dated 31-3-2016 holding that the Petitioners are entitled to additional compensation in respect of the acquired land. Thereafter the Petitioner learnt that at the time of making payment of the compensation, the Respondent had deducted 10% amount towards royalty (Najrana). Hence, the Petitioner, by letter dated 11-1-2017 (Exhibit-F) had requested the Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 1, Solapur to refund the said 10% amount with interest. The Petitioner has also claimed interest under section 34 of the said Act from the date of the Award i.e. 31-3-2016 passed under section 28-A of the said Act till the date of payment i.e. 5-12-2016.

4. The learned counsel submits that thereafter the Petitioner again, by letter dated 25-7-2017 called upon the Special Land Acquisition Officer to refund the said amount immediately stating that the Government Resolution is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Thereafter the Petitioner wrote another letter dated 22-9-2017 to the Special Land Acquisition Officer reminding him to take immediate steps for refund of the said amount. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, by his letter dated 29-7-2017 rejected the Petitioner’s Application dated 25-7-2017 on the ground that they have instructions from the Government vide Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017 to deduct 10% from the compensation if the land comes under Class-II.

5. Being aggrieved by the letter dated 29-7-2017 issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer rejecting their Application dated 25-7-2017 for refund of 10% amount which was deducted towards royalty amount and interest under section 34 of the said Act for the period from 31-3-2016 (date of award) to 5-12-2016 (date of payment), filed the present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has erred in coming to the conclusion that on the basis of the letter dated 2-7-2009 and Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017, they are entitled to deduct 10% royalty amount from the compensation payable to the Petitioner under the said Act. He submits that the said Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017 is applicable only to Mahar Watan Land and not at all applicable to the cases under the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (BTLR Act) and other occupants of Class-II land. He submits that on the basis of the letter dated 2-7-2009 and/or Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017 the Respondent has no right to deduct 10% royalty amount from the amount payable towards the compensation. He submits that in any case, the Government Resolution dated 11-1-2017 is not applicable to the facts of the present case because the Award was