R.M. BORDE, J.

1. Heard Mr. Prashant Bhavake, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. R.S. Pawar, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. N.P. Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

2. Rule in each of the petitions. With the consent of parties, all the petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

3. Since the issues involved in all these petitions are interlinked and therefore, it is only appropriate that all these petitions are taken up and disposed of together by common judgment and order.

4. Though the petitioners in these petitions have raised challenge to the land acquisition award, however, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, on instructions, states that the petitioners do not want to agitate the grievance as regards the challenge to the award already declared by the Land Acquisition Officer and would restrict its claim only so far as the claim relating to grant of rental compensation payable to the petitioners under the Government Resolution (G.R.) dated 1st December 1972, 2nd July 1979 and 14th June 2001 with all the arrears together with interest at the rate of 15% per annum.

5. It is the contention of the petitioners that the possession of land has been taken over before initiation of proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and as such the petitioners are entitled to claim rental compensation. The petitioners have also tendered applications to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Special Land Acquisition Officer/Collector as well as Acquiring Body requesting them to determine the amount of rental compensation and pay the same to the petitioners. It is further pointed out that though the applications are tendered to the Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the Acquiring Body, there is no determination of the amount of rental compensation and as such, the petitioners are deprived of the monetary benefits.

6. In the aforesaid circumstances, all these petitions can be disposed of by issuing directions to the District Collector that District Collector himself or through his sub-ordinate Officers either Sub-Divisional Officer or Special Land Acquisition Officer to determine the amount of rental compensation with further directions to the Acquiring Body as well as the Collector to pay the amount so determined to the petitioners within specified time period.

7. The State Government has formulated policy in respect of payment of rental compensation to the claimants in such of those cases where the landed properties have been taken over in possession prior to initiation of proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act. Under the G.Rs. dated 1st December 1972 and 2nd April 1979, the State has provided for the Scheme for payment of rental compensation at the rate of 6.5% of the final award value in respect of both non-agricultural and agricultural lands. The amount of rental compensation has been enhanced to 8% in view of G.R. dated 2nd April 1979. In the matter of Maimune Banu Hamidali Khan and ors. Vs. State and others, (2001) 3 BCR 529, the Division Bench of this Court upheld entitlement of such of those claimants whose lands have been taken over in possession by the Acquiring Body or the State prior to initiation of proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act to receive rental compensation at the rate prescribed under G.R. dated 24th March 1988 and, it was further directed to release the amount as expeditiously as possible. The matter was carried to the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the State and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Maharashtra and ors vs. Maimune Banu and others, (2003) 4 MhLJ 727 (SC) confirmed the order passed by the High Court. In paragraph 9 of the judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed thus:

"There is no difficulty and we find none as to why the compensation on the basis of value determined by the Land Acquisition Officer cannot be paid. If there is upward revision of the amount, the consequences will follow and if necessary r