Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.SONAK, JITENDRA JAIN
Suvarna Vasant Bhise – Appellant
Versus
National Highways Authority of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MS Sonak J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
3. In any event, by our order dated 21 March 2025, we had posted this matter on 16 April 2025 at 2.30 pm for final disposal. Even directions were issued to complete the pleadings by 9 April 2025.
4. The State Government and Mr Satish Dhumal, the Competent Authority, have filed their affidavits in this matter. Respondents 5 and 6 have not filed any affidavits despite the opportunity.
5. In addition to the affidavit, a compilation of documents was also tendered across the bar on behalf of Mr Satish Dhumal, and the same was taken on record.
6. The Petitioners challenge the competent authority’s order dated 25 April 2022 apportioning and disbursing the compensation amount for the subject property in favour of Respondents 5 and 6.
7. This Petition was instituted on 4 May 2022, and an interim order was obtained on 6 May 2022. However, Mr Satish Dhumal, the then competent authority, who was impleaded in this Petition in person, has filed an affidavit to say that the compensation amount of Rs. 1,00,21,122/-
The competent authority lacks jurisdiction to decide compensation apportionment disputes under the National Highways Act, which must be referred to the Principal Civil Court.
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to decide apportionment disputes, which must be referred to the Principal Civil Court.
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to apportion compensation and must refer such disputes to the Principal Civil Court.
Apportionment disputes under the Maharashtra Highways Act must be referred to the Principal Civil Court, and actions by the Land Acquisition Officer that violate this principle are ultra vires.
Disputes regarding compensation apportionment under the MIDC Act must be referred to a judicial authority, not decided by administrative officers, ensuring proper legal process is followed.
The Land Acquisition Officer lacks jurisdiction to decide disputes over compensation apportionment, which must be referred to the Principal Civil Court for resolution.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that disputes regarding apportionment of compensation under the National Highways Act should be referred to the principal civil court of origin....
(1) Acquisition of land – If any dispute arises as to apportionment of amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom same or any part thereof is payable, then, competent authority shall refer d....
when the suit is pending before the competent Civil Court, the rights can be crystallized only by the competent Civil Court not by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
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
