Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKAR
Hirabai Sonu Wanjari (Kale) – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to rejection of delayed section 64 references. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. collector can condone delay up to one year. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. no power for collector beyond one-year limit. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. lockdown, illiteracy justify sufficient cause. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. petitions allowed; orders quashed, references directed. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
1. Both the petitions are filed challenging the orders passed by the Collector refusing to entertain the statutory applications under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Settlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “Right to Fair Compensation Act”) for making reference to the competent Court of the land owners, who have raised dispute pertaining to the quantum of compensation that has been awarded in pursuance to the land acquired by respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the reference applications of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.1508 of 2026 and Writ Petition No.1509 of 2026 have been rejected by respondent No.3 on the ground of delay of 67 and 337 days respectively. Learned Advocate f
Collector empowered under proviso to Section 64(2)(b) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 to condone delay in reference applications up to one year if sufficient cause shown; must consider causes like lockdown and....
The court emphasizes the discretion of the District Collector under Section 64(2) allowing extensions for applications concerning compensation, reinforcing rights under Article 300 A of the Constitut....
The authority must provide justifiable reasons when refusing to condone delay in processing compensation claims, ensuring compliance with statutory requirements and protecting substantive rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority cannot condone delay beyond the maximum statutory period as prescribed by the relevant provisions of the Act of 2013.
The provision for seeking condonation of delay under Section 64(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation And Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 influenced the cou....
The limitation period for applications under Section 64 of the Act is calculated from the date of the modified award, not the original award.
The period for seeking reference under the Land Acquisition Act runs from the date of knowledge of the award, ensuring fairness in the process.
Mandamus issued for expeditious disposal of land acquisition reference and delay condonation applications.
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
