wp914.21.odt 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION No.914 OF 2021

Sagir Sayyad Mehfooz Sayyad

: Petitioner

...VERSUS...

State of Maharashtra,

through its Secretary,

Urban Development Department,

Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 and others. : Respondent

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

Mr. Muhammed Ateeque, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. D.P. Thakare, Addl. GP for the Respondent Nos.1 and 7.

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

CORAM :

NITIN JAMDAR AND

ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

DATED : 16 FEBRUARY 2021.

P.C. :

The Petitioner has sought three different reliefs. First,

to initiate action against Respondent Nos.3 to 6 as per Section 84

and 85 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in

Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in

short, “Act, 2013”). Second, directing the concerned Authority to

refer the dispute raised by the Petitioner regarding the Petitioner’s

entitlement and Respondent Nos.3 to 6 non-entitlement to the

award compensation. Third, a declaration to set aside the sale-deed

executed by the Respondent Nos.3 to 6.

wp914.21.odt 2/2

2.

As far as the declaration to set aside the sale-deed is

concerned the Petitioner will have to take recourse to appropriate

remedy. As regards the action to be taken under Section 64 and

76 of the Act, 2013 Petitioner has already made an application in

November 2020. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner states

that no action is taken and there is a gross delay. The application

in filed in November 2020 and petition is immediately filed in

January 2021. This cannot be considered as a case of gross delay

so as to warrant issuance of a mandamus. All that be say is that

once this application is made the authority should process the same

as per law expeditiously.

3.

As regards the direction to initiate action against

Respondent Nos.3 to 6 under Section 84 and 85 is concerned,

those Sections envisage penalty if a false information is supplied.

When a declaration is given by a competent Court that the sale-

deed was fraudulent or that Respondent Nos.3 to 6 were not

entitled to compensation, yet obtained it, at that stage Sections 84

and 85 may come in play. The direction as sought for, therefore,

cannot be issued at this stage.

4.

With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed

of.

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.]

[NITIN JAMDAR, J.]

wadode