Back
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, Y. G. KHOBRAGADE
Nandkumar S/o. Tukaram Janrao – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, Mantralaya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Y.G. Khobragade, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of both sides, the petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. By the present petition, the petitioner prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions against the Respondents to pay compensation for his acquired land admeasuring 12 R from Gut No. 104 of village Vakti, Tq. Vaijapur Dist. Aurangabad as per the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short RFC & TLA & R, Act, 2013) within a period of two months from the date of order or in alternative, to deposit said compensation before this Court.
3. Mr. Shinde, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently canvased that the petitioner’s father Shri Tukaram Sakharam Janrao was owner of agriculture land bearing Gat No. 104 admeasuring 12 R at village Vakti, Tq. Vaijapur Dist. Aurangabad. In the year 1979, Respondent No. 4 acquiring body took possession of the land for construction of Nandur-Madhmeshwar Canal. On 31-01-1981, Respondent No. 3 Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award in File No. 80
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acquisition proceeding does not lapse under Sec. 24 of RFC & TLA & R, Act, 2013 if the compensation for the acquired land is already depos....
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
The physical possession of the land and tendering of compensation discharge the state's obligation, and the land essential for public purpose cannot be released from acquisition.
Section 24 of the Right to Compensation Act does not apply to acquisitions initiated under the West Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act; subsequent purchasers can only claim compensation based on ....
The acquisition process does not lapse under section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if compensation has been tendered to the landowners and possession of the land has been taken by the acquiring authority.
Land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) when compensation is not paid and possession is not taken for over five years, clarifying definitions of 'paid' and 'deposited'.
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.
The main legal point established is that under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, the lapse of acquisition proceedings is contingent upon the non-payment of compensation and non-possession of the land....
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
