Back
A.A.SAYED, ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
Gautamsheth Kisan Wadve – Appellant
Versus
Kisan Gangaram Kale – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. constitutional and statutory context for land acquisition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. challenge to sdo's decisions on compensation claims. (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. decisions on property assigned to tribals. (Para 13 , 15 , 19) |
| 4. the role of consent terms in land acquisition disputes. (Para 16 , 22 , 32 , 36) |
| 5. final orders for compensation distribution. (Para 95) |
JUDGMENT
Anuja Prabhudessai, J. - All these Petitions involve identical issues and are being disposed of by this common Judgment and Order.
2. The Petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of the orders passed by the SDO rejecting their applications for payment of compensation. The Petitioners have also prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the SDO to refer the dispute to the Competent Court and to deposit the compensation in the said Court.
3. The State of Maharashtra proposed to develop the lands situated in villages Rohkal and Ambethan, Taluka Khed, Pune District as Chakan Industrial Area, phase 5. By notification dated 20.09.2003, issued in exercise of powers under Section 1 (3) of the MAHARASHTRA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT , 1961, hereinafter referred to as the MID Act, the provisions of Chapter
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
