Shubhada S Kadam

11 wp 2639.21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.2639 of 2021

Shantinagar Zopadpattidharak Sangh through

its President – Advocate Amol K. Kotiwale and ors.

….Petitioners

Versus

The Competent Authority & Deputy Collector,

Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Krushna Khore,

Solapur and ors.

….Respondents

Dr. Ramdas P. Sabban, advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for the State.

Mr. Rakesh L. Singh along with Ms. Heena Shaikh i/b. M. V. Kini and Co.,

advocate for respondent No.3.

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &

S. M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 17^th NOVEMBER, 2021.

P.C. :

1.

Heard Dr. Sabban, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2.

The petitioners are challenging the order dated 20^th January,

2020. The principal prayer in the petition is prayer clause (a) whereby

the petitioners raised a challenge to the order passed by the Competent

Authority & Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Officer No.11, Krushna

Khore, Solalpur – respondent No.1 in the present petition. Learned

counsel for the petitioners invited our attention to certain documents

1/5

SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Digitally

signed by

SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Date:

2021.11.22

14:15:29

+0530

SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Digitally

signed by

SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Date:

2021.11.22

14:15:29

+0530

Shubhada S Kadam

11 wp 2639.21.doc

placed on record and submitted that the petitioners were occupying the

premises i.e. part of land bearing survey No.98A and 98B situated at

village – Kasabe(Shelgi), Tal. North Solapur, District – Solapur. Learned

counsel for the petitioners submitted that some petitioners have erected

hutments for residence, whereas some petitioners have constructed small

tin sheets shops for earning their livelihood. It is submitted that the

premises were occupied since long time. In support of all these

statements, our attention was invited to documents placed on record at

Exhibit ‘A’, page 33 i.e. copy of gazette notification dated 4^th April, 1991

as well as list of occupants under the caption “Shantinagar Zopadpatti

Solapur Mahanagar Pallika”. It is also submitted by learned counsel for

the petitioners that a list placed on record at pages 34 to 39 is certified

list through the competent authority of Solapur Municipal Corporation and

this information was sought for by approaching the Corporation under the

Right to Information Act. A receipt to that effect is placed on record at

page 40. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners have received certain amounts under Section 3G of the

National Highways Act, 1956. He further submitted that the petitioners are

entitled to get all the resettlement benefits as displaced person under the

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,

Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and more particularly under

Section 31 of the said Act.

2/5

Shubhada S Kadam

11 wp 2639.21.doc

3.

It may not be necessary for us to refer to the provisions in

detail. Suffice to say that the petitioners though were claiming benefits

under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency

in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, the

competent authority merely on the ground that there was an objection

raised by the original land owner vix. Shri Basavraj Gurappa Deshmukh,

rejected the claim of the petitioners.

4.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners

that the authority ought to have considered the provisions of the Act qua

the fact that these petitioners were the occupants of the land for a

considerable long period and Section 31 of the provisions of the Right to

Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation

and Resettlement Act, 2013, is couched in a way so as to provide benefits

to the affected fa