JUDGMENT :

R.D. DHANUKA, J.

1. Learned counsel appearing for the parties vehemently states that the facts and issues involved in these matters, are identical and can be disposed of by a common order. Statement is accepted.

2. Since the matters and issue involved are identical, we have taken the facts and submissions from Writ Petition No. 3393/2023.

3. In these bunch of Petitions, the predecessor of the Petitioners, Late Maruti Ganu Sutar, who is a Project Affected Person, his land was acquired by the State of Maharashtra for construction of Koyna Project in the year 1962. The said Mr. Maruti Ganu Sutar passed away, leaving behind him Mr. Kisan Govind Sutar (Grandson, the Petitioner herein). According to the Petitioners, Respondent No.1 formulated a scheme to rehabilitate the said project affected person.

4. Under the said Scheme, the displaced project affected persons being affected are entitled for allotment of agricultural land as per the Maharashtra Project Affected Person Rehabilitation Act, 1999 (for short ‘the Rehabilitation Act’).

5. On 15th March, 1963, an Award being Award No. LAQ.SR.-69 came to be passed in favour of Mr. Maruti Ganu Sutar being the Project Affected Persons at Serial No. 145 in Schedule-E. It is the case of the Petitioners that as per policy decision promulgated by the State Government, Maharashtra for resettlement of project affected person, the Petitioners were offered compensation of Rs.209-30/- and also offered resettlement by allotment of an agricultural lands as per the said Rehabilitation Act. The Petitioners made a representation on 8th September, 2020 and applied for agricultural plot of land as per the said Scheme. According to the Petitioner the said application is still pending.

6. The Petitioners filed this Petition on 21 January, 2021, inter alia, praying for a Writ of Mandamus against the Respondents to expeditiously allot the land to the Petitioner as per the representation dated 8 September, 2020. Writ Petition(s) are opposed by the learned AGP for the Respondents-State. Learned counsel for the Petitioners in these bunch of Petitions placed reliance on the judgment of this Court delivered on 3rd December, 2019 in Writ Petition No. 565 of 2019 in case of Kisan @ Krishna Bhagu Kadam & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. and submitted that in the identical matter, this Court had granted such reliefs.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners at length and we have considered the documents annexed to the Petition. We have also considered the additional documents filed by the Petitioners in February, 2022.

8. It is the case of the Petitioners themselves that the land acquisition award was made in the year 1963 in favour of the predecessor of the Petitioners. The Petition is silent as to whether any compensation amount has been deposited at the instance of the Petitioners for the purpose of allotment of the land. On the contrary, the averments made in the Additional Affidavit filed by the Petitioners, indicates that the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act came into force in the year 1999 whereas the land was acquired in the year 1963. The condition of deposit of 65% compensation amount is not applicable in the Petitioner’s case as the said Rehabilitation Act came into force in 1999. However, still the Petitioners are willing and ready to deposit the 65% of compensation amount at the time of passing of the Award, if at all Court directs them to deposit the said amount, before the allotment of alternate lands.

9. It is thus a common ground that the Petitioners had accepted the entire compensation amount paid as per the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act made in the year 1963 passed pursuant to the award dated 15 March, 1963 passed in favour of the predecessor of the Petitioners. The representation came to be made for the first time on 8 September, 2020. The Learned AGP strongly placed reliance on the judgment of this Court delivered on 8 December, 2022 in Wr