Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Ravindra V. Ghuge and S.G. Dige, JJ.
Shashikant and Ors. – Petitioners
versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No.2152 of 2017
Decided on 1.7.2022

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar h/f Mr. A.P. Avhad, Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1, 5 and 6: Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP
For the Respondent Nos.2 to 4:Mr. B.R. Survase, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
Land of a farmer cannot be acquired with taking recourse to provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Headnote:
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Sections 4 and 6 – Maharashtra Underground Pipelines and Underground Ducts (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2018 – Section 9(1) and (2) – Acquisition of land – Purpose of acquisition of petitioners’ land is for laying down underground pipeline which would carry water from a Dam to fields of agriculturists – Petitioners’ are farmers and their source of income is farming – Since last couple of years they are pleading respondents’ to acquire their lands as per provisions of Land Acquisition Act – Initially, it was decided to acquire lands of petitioners under Land Acquisition Act, but it was not done – Petitioners’ lands are near city area – Such petitioners’ land cannot remain as agricultural land forever – Possession of petitioners’ lands has already been taken in year 2010 – Underground pipeline is laid in land of petitioners – Notification issued by Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, quashed and set aside – Respondents directed to complete land acquisition proceedings of petitioners’ lands as per provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. (Paras 23, 24, 25 and 26)
Result: Writ Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Dige, J.—By this petition, the petitioners are praying for issuance of writ of mandamus against the respondents directing them to complete the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands needed for the second phase of Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme and pay compensation on declaring the award to the petitioners as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. (Hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2013”).

2. The petitioners also prays to quash and set aside the impugned notification/notice dated 31st August, 2019 issued by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Aurangabad whereby the respondents have taken a decision to acquire the lands as per section 9(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Underground Pipelines and Underground Ducts (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2018 (Hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2018”).

3. Respondent no.1 is the State of Maharashtra. Respondent No.2 is the Chief Engineer of Water Resources Division, Aurangabad. Respondent no.3 is the Corporation established by the State Government to develop irrigation facilities in the Marathwada region. Respondent nos.4 to 6 are the authorities of the State.

4. The brief facts of the case are as under:—

(a) The petitioners are farmers having their agricultural lands in village Pimpalwadi and Isarwadi, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad. The petitioners have no other source of income except farming. The petitioners have been cultivating their lands and maintaining themselves and their families. The Government of Maharashtra through its Irrigation Department undertook a scheme named as Bramhagavhan Lift Irrigation Scheme to make available irrigation facilities to some of the villages from Paithan Tahsil by laying down a pipeline from the Jayakwadi Dam and also for construction of canals at villages Shekta, Lohgaon, Bramhagavhan, Gadhegaon etc. The work of the first phase of the project was started sometime in the year 1987. The respondents acquired the lands for the said project and paid the compensation to the farmers vide the award dated 05.02.1990.

(b) Respondent nos.1 to 4 decided to undertake the work of the second phase of the project. For the second phase of the project, the lands situated at village Pimpalwadi and Isarwadi are affected. The advance possession of the lands were taken by private negotiations. It was agreed to make the payment of rental compensation till the acquisition is finalized by declaration of award. Accordingly, the petitioners have handed over the possession of the lands to respondent nos.1 to 4, so also respondents started paying annual rental compensation to the petitioners since the year 2010 onwards.

(c) Respondent nos.1 to 3 caused the joint measurement of the lands belonging to the petitioners through respondent no.4 sometime in November, 2010. It is a matter of record that the respondents changed it’s earlier decision to lay down the pipeline of 35 meters to 13 meters and for that purposes again joint measurement was carried out in the year 2011. On both occasions, after receipt of the joint measurement reports, respondent no.3 invited the claims and objections from the concerned land owners and thereafter further steps of acquisition have been taken.

(d) Respondent Nos.3 and 4-acquiring body have determined the rates at which the compensation is to be paid to the petitioners for the acquired lands and submitted a report to the office of respondent no.2 on 2nd May, 2014.

(e) Respondent nos.1 to 4 made certain changes in the proposal of the size of the pipeline and a revised administrative sanction was accorded to lay down the pipeline by digging a channel in the width of 13 meters. The petitioners consented to the acquisition of their lands for the area which the respondents needed for laying down the pipelines as per revised proposal. On 15th March, 2016, respondent no.1 declared the revised proposal of the State Governm