16-cwp-2588-21.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 2588 OF 2021

Gurunath D. Nadgonde and ors.

… Petitioners

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and ors.

… Respondents

----------------

Mr. Siddharth Chapalgaonkar for the Petitioners.

Ms M.S. Bane, AGP for the Respondent – State.

----------------

CORAM

:

PRASANNA B. VARALE &

N.R. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE

:

23.09.2021.

P.C.

1]

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as

the learned AGP for the respondents – State.

2]

The facts giving rise to the present petition can be

summarized as under.

3]

The petitioners are owners of lands bearing Gat No. 528

admeasuring 4 H 6 R, Pot Kharab 31 R, Gat No.901

admeasuring 2 H 44 R, Pot Kharab 9 R, Gat No. 983

admeasuring 0 H 18 R, Pot Kharab 1 R and Gat No. 977

admeasuring 0 H 60 R, Pot Kharab 5 R R situated at village

Vhannur, Taluka Kagal, District Kolhapur.

4]

By fnal award dated 8.4.2020, the aforesaid lands of the

petitioners came to be acquired for rehabilitation of persons

affected by Dudhganga rrrigation Canal Proeect.

Dinesh Sherla

1/3

DINESH

SADANAND

SHERLA

Digitally

signed by

DINESH

SADANAND

SHERLA

Date:

2021.09.28

11:26:21

+0500

16-cwp-2588-21.doc

5]

By modifed/supplementary award dated 1.9.2020, the

respondent No.2 excluded Pot Kharab land to the extent of 41

R from acquisition.

6]

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a

very vague reason is assigned in the modifed award for

excluding 41 R Pot Kharab land from the fnal award dated

8.4.2020. The learned counsel further submitted that the

acquisition proceedings were initiated on the basis of report of

Deputy Superintendent of land records in which there was

specifc reference of O H 41 R Pot Kharab land in addition to

7H 30 R Jirayat land. rt is submitted that proclamation for

acquisition was accordingly, amended and O H 41 R Pot

Kharab land was made part of acquisition proceedings. rt is

submitted that by passing modifed/supplementary award, the

respondent No.2, in effect, reviewed the fnal award dated

8.4.2020. rt is submitted that there is no provision of review in

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and the Resettlement Act, 2013. On

these submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioners

prayed for allowing the petition in terms of prayer clause (a).

7]

Per contra, the learned AGP for the respondent – State

submits that as there are technical difculties in taking

possession of acquisition lands, the modifed/ supplementary

award has been passed. The learned AGP, therefore, submits

that the petition may be dismissed.

Dinesh Sherla

2/3

16-cwp-2588-21.doc

8]

Perused the afdavit-in-reply fled on behalf of

respondent Nos.1 to 3. There is nothing in the afdavit-in-

reply what sort of technical difculties are there. On the

contrary, it appears that the report of Deputy Superintendent

of land records was called and on the basis of said report, the

proclamation was amended and 41 R Pot Kharat land was

included and was made part of acquisition proceedings.

Therefore, we are of the opinion that the respondent No.2 was

not eustifed in modifying the award dated 8.4.2020 on the

basis of vague reason that there are technical difculties in

taking possession of 41 R Pot Kharat land, without specifying

those technical difculties. rn the result, the petition is

allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The modifed award

dated 1.9.2020 in Bhusampadan/Sr/228/2018 is quashed and

set aside.

9]

Needless to state that the petitioners shall be paid

compensation as per fnal award dated 8.4.2020.

10]

Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

(PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Dinesh Sherla

3/3