Back
R. D. DHANUKA, M. M. SATHAYE
Atur Park-4 Co-operative Housing Society Limited, a Co-operative Society – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.M. SATHAYE, J.
1. Rule. Learned AGP waives service for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 9. Mr. Pethe, learned Advocate waives service for Respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Mr. Desphande appears for Atur Park Co-op Housing Society Ltd. (Intervenor) who was permitted to attend final hearing and make submissions if necessary, under Order dated 23/02/2021 in Interim Application No. 353 of 2021. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The Petition is heard finally by consent of the parties.
2. This is a Petition filed ostensibly by the Society but through Power of Attorney holder Developer through its partner, under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India, seeking a writ of mandamus directing Respondents (State Government and Pune Municipal Corporation Authorities) to acquire an area of 1891.85 sq mtrs, comprising of 15.70 mtrs wide strip of land on the south side of CTS No. 11/1/A adjoining to the railway track situated at 5, Koregaon Road, Taluka Haveli, District Pune. The Petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus directing Respondents to acquire the land under The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (For short Fair Compe
The right to property under Article 300A mandates just compensation for land utilized by authorities, overriding regulations allowing nominal payment, ensuring constitutional protections are upheld.
The owner of land reserved for public purposes is entitled to Transferable Development Rights (TDR) if no compensation has been awarded and possession has not been taken by the planning authority, de....
The court emphasized that the petitioners' claims lacked merit as no land was released in favor of private builders, and the petitioners' grievances were based on disputed questions of facts.
The court emphasized that public interest in access to a completed public road outweighs private claims, disallowing obstruction based on width specifications set by plaintiffs.
The acquisition proceedings under Award No.12/83 were held not to lapse in terms of Sec. 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act and they will continue.
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
