2024:BHC-AS:14953 Ajay IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12189 OF 2022 The Administrator Nashik, City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. .. Petitioner Versus Sham Nariman Dumasia and Ors. .. Respondents ....................

 Mr. Nitin V. Gangal a/w. Ms. Prerna Shukla, Mr. Ashok Kadam, Ms.

Prapti Karkera, i/by. Ms. Namita Mistry, Advocates for Petitioner.

 Mr. Anil Ahuja a/w. Ms. Bhavana Khemani, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 9C, 20C, 21C, 21D, 31(1A), 31(1D) to 31(1G), 31(2B) to 31(2G), 40(2) to 40(7), 40(8B), 40(9A) to 40(9C).

...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : MARCH 28, 2024.

JUDGMENT:

1. Heard Mr. Gangal, learned Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. Ahuja, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 9C, 20C, 21C, 21D, 31(1A), 31(1D) to 31(1G), 31(2B) to 31(2G), 40(2) to 40(7), 40(8B), 40(9A) to 40(9C).

2. Present Writ Petition takes exception to the impugned order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the learned District Court in an Application seeking review of the order dated 04.08.2011 passed by the learned District Court in Land Reference Darkhast No.203 of 1995. An Application below Exhibit “17” was filed by the Decree Holders (80 in number) against the Judgment Debtors (Petitioner before me)

seeking to verify and compute the calculations in respect of the compensation declared in the Award by the Reference Court as far back as in the year 1986.

3. Admittedly, possession of the Claimants’ lands were taken over on different dates in the years 1982 – 1983. Award dated 12.02.1986 was passed allowing and granting compensation @ 6 per square meter to the advantageous group and Rs.4 per square meter for the undeveloped plots. The said Award was challenged in Reference proceedings before the District Court. Reference Award was passed by the learned District Court on 26.10.1994 enhancing the rate to Rs.33 per square meter for the advantageous group and Rs.24 per square meter for the undeveloped plots. First Appeals were filed in this Court by the Writ Petitioners as also by some of the Claimants which came to be decided by judgment dated 31.01.2008 whereby the rate was enhanced to Rs.58.80 per square meter for the advantageous group and Rs.53.55 per square meter for undeveloped plots.

4. We are now in the year 2024, when the present Writ Petition is argued before me. This Court was seized of the matter for the first time on 09.02.2024 and substantive orders were passed directing the parties to comply with details of computation and objections, if any, namely the Writ Petitioner on 09.02.2024, 23.02.2024 and

01.03.2024.

5. Pursuant to the directions contained in the aforesaid orders, 16 out of 80 Claimants are today represented by Mr. Ahuja and he has placed on record the details of the compensation awarded and paid and which has remained to be paid to the Claimants. Rest of the Claimants have been served by substituted service. They are unrepresented. The delay has occurred only because of the issue of computation and calculation of the correct amounts. It is an irony that in respect of land acquisition which had taken place in the year 1986, the Claimants have had to wait for receiving the entire compensation amount for a period of more than 38 years until today. Many of the Claimants may have unfortunately perished and are now probably survived by legal heirs and successors-in-title as argued by Mr. Ahuja. Mr. Gangal at this juncture has interjected the dictation and would submit that whatever amounts came to be deposited by the Petitioner were withdrawn by the Claimants from time to time That is no solace. He may be right but the entire amounts have not been paid over to the Claimants till date and substantial balance remains to be paid and the balance as on today in respect of the 80 Claimants is more than Rs.14 Crores i.e. approximately 25%. Hence, Mr. Gangal appearing for the Writ Petitioner cannot make virtue by stating that out of the total amount