JUDGMENT :

SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.

1. Rule. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. All these petitions raise common questions of fact and law and, therefore, they are being decided together by this common judgment. However, in order to understand the facts pleaded and the prayers made in each of the petitions, it is necessary that their summary is made. Their summary is given in the ensuing paragraphs.

Writ Petition No.2012 of 2021 :

3. This petition is filed by seven petitioners. They claim to be the tenants of one shop block each on Kelibag Road, Mahal, Nagpur. The details of their tenancy are mentioned in Paragraph 1 of the petition. These petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned declaration dated 16-10-2020 issued by the respondent No.2- Collector, Nagpur, under Section 126(4) of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, “the MRTP Act”) read with Section 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “the LA Act of 2013) and, therefore, they seek its quashing, as being violative of the provisions of the LA Act of 2013. By this declaration, the re