Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Bom) 1629

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, S.G. DIGE, JJ.
Shashikant S/o Bhanudas Shelke – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 2152 of 2017
Decided On : 01-07-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: P.R. Katneshwarkar, A.P. Avhad.
For the Respondents: P.K. Lakhotiya, B.R. Survase.

The court established that the Act of 2018 did not apply to the case, and the petitioners were entitled to compensation under the Act of 2013 for the acquisition of their lands.

Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Maharashtra Underground Pipelines and Underground Ducts (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2018 - Section 9(1) and (2)
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, farmers, sought mandamus to complete land acquisition proceedings for the Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme's second phase and pay compensation as per the Act of 2013. They also challenged a notification under the Act of 2018 for land acquisition.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioners' lands were taken for the irrigation scheme, and possession was already acquired. The court held that the Act of 2018 did not apply, and the petitioners were entitled to compensation under the Act of 2013.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners' lands could be acquired under Section 9(1) and (2) of the Act of 2018.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the Act of 2018 did not apply to the case, as the lands were already in possession of the respondents and the petitioners were entitled to compensation under the Act of 2013.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the notification under the Act of 2018 was quashed, and the respondents were directed to complete the land acquisition proceedings as per the Act of 2013.

JUDGMENT :

S.G. DIGE, J.

1. By this petition, the petitioners are praying for issuance of writ of mandamus against the respondents directing them to complete the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands needed for the second phase of Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme and pay compensation on declaring the award to the petitioners as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2013”).

2. The petitioners also prays to quash and set aside the impugned notification/notice dated 31st August, 2019 issued by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Aurangabad whereby the respondents have taken a decision to acquire the lands as per section 9(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Underground Pipelines and Underground Ducts (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2018”).

3. Respondent no. 1 is the State of Maharashtra. Respondent No. 2 is the Chief Engineer of Water Resources Division, Aurangabad. Respondent no. 3 is the Corporation established by the State Government to develop irrigation facilities in the Marathwada region. Respondent nos. 4 to 6 are the authorities of the State.

4. The brief facts of the case are as under:

(a) The petitioners are farmers having their agricultural lands in village Pimpalwadi and Isarwadi, Tq. Paithan, District Aurangabad. The petitioners have no other source of income except farming. The petitioners have been cultivating their lands and maintaining themselves and their families. The Government of Maharashtra through its Irrigation Department undertook a scheme named as Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme to make available irrigation facilities to some of the villages from Paithan Tahsil by laying down a pipeline from the Jayakwadi Dam and also for construction of canals at villages Shekta, Lohgaon, Bramhagavhan, Gadhegaon etc. The work of the first phase of the project was started sometime in the year 1987. The respondents acquired the lands for the said project and paid the compensation to the farmers vide the award dated 05.02.1990.

(b) Respondent nos. 1 to 4 decided to undertake the work of the second phase of the project. For the second phase of the project, the lands situated at village Pimpalwadi and Isarwadi are affected. The advance possession of the lands were taken by private negotiations. It was agreed to make the payment of rental compensation till the acquisition is finalized by declaration of award. Accordingly, the petitioners have handed over the possession of the lands to respondent nos. 1 to 4, so also respondents started paying annual rental compensation to the petitioners since the year 2010 onwards.

(c) Respondent nos. 1 to 3 caused the joint measurement of the lands belonging to the petitioners through respondent no. 4 sometime in November, 2010. It is a matter of record that the respondents changed it’s earlier decision to lay down the pipeline of 35 meters to 13 meters and for that purposes again joint measurement was carried out in the year 2011. On both occasions, after receipt of the joint measurement reports, respondent no. 3 invited the claims and objections from the concerned land owners and thereafter further steps of acquisition have been taken.

(d) Respondent Nos. 3 and 4-acquiring body have determined the rates at which the compensation is to be paid to the petitioners for the acquired lands and submitted a report to the office of respondent no. 2 on 2nd May, 2014.

(e) Respondent nos. 1 to 4 made certain changes in the proposal of the size of the pipeline and a revised administrative sanction was accorded to lay down the pipeline by digging a channel in the width of 13 meters. The petitioners consented to the acquisition of their lands for the area which the respondents needed for laying down the pipelines as per revised proposal. On 15th March, 2016, respondent no. 1 declared the revised proposal of the State Go