Shri Mahadeo Vitthal Wadkar v. District Resettlement Officer, Satara And ORS.
pvr 1 914wp6915-16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition NO. 6915 OF 2016 Shri Dnyandeo Deoba Bhosale Through POA Shri. R. A. Dhavale
...Petitioner
Versus
1.District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors. ...Respondents And Writ Petition NO. 6908 OF 2016 Shri Ramchandra Dhondiba Patane Through POA Shri. Dattatray P. Wankar
...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors. ...Respondents And Writ Petition NO. 6912 OF 2016 Shri Krishna Jyoti Sapkal Through POA Shri. Ramesh N. Asabe
...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors. ...Respondents WITH Writ Petition NO. 6891 OF 2016 Shri Baburao Namdeo Navghane Through POA Shri. K.N. Swami
...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors. ...Respondents WITH Writ Petition NO. 6911 OF 2016 Shri Mahadeo Vitthal Wadkar
...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors. ...Respondents
pvr 2 914wp6915-16.doc WITH Writ Petition NO. 6913 OF 2016 Shri Janu @ Devji Ramchandra Jadhav Through POA ...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors.
...Respondents
WITH Writ Petition NO. 6914 OF 2016 Shri. Tukaram Chimaji Navghane Through POA Kedarnath N. Swami
...Petitioner
Versus
District Resettlement Officer, Satara And Ors.
...Respondents
---- Mr.I.M.Khairdi, for the Petitioner.
Ms.S.S.Bhende, AGP for the State-Respondents. --- CORAM :- DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J., & G. S. KULKARNI, J.
DATE :- JANUARY 31, 2017 ---- P. C. :- 1.
This batch of petitions is by petitioners who were holding lands at Village Vasole and Velang, Taluka Wai, District Satara. These lands were acquired for "Dhom Irrigation Project" as per the procedure adopted under the Land Acquisition Act. In Writ Petition No.6913 of 2016, the Petitioner is concerned with land at Jhanjwad, Taluka Mahabaleshwar, District Satara which came to be acquired for the project of Koyana Dam.
pvr 3 914wp6915-16.doc 2.
It is not in dispute that the possession of the land, with which the petitioners are concerned was taken over. Further, alternate lands to be allotted to the project affected persons under the scheme undertaken by the Government, were also allotted to the petitioners. Details of these allotments are set out in each of these petitions. These lands are allotted at different places. The petitioners have also paid purchase price for these alternate lands as being offered to the petitioners. Despite fulfilling all the official formalities for allotment of the alternate lands, the petitioners are still to receive possession of the alternate lands as allotted in favour of the petitioners. These lands were required to be transferred in favour of the petitioners as also its possession was to be handed over to the petitioners.
Being aggrieved by this inaction on the part of the State Authorities, the petitioners had issued a legal notice calling upon the the Respondents to do the needful and put the petitioners in possession of the alternate lands. However, the legal notices did not bear any fruits. In respect of some of the petitioners, certain queries were raised, which were answered, as also according to the petitioners the queries were not correct.
4.
Having considered the above facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it appropriate to dispose of the present Petitions by directing the Rehabilitation Officer to treat each of these Writ Petitions as representations and on due consideration of the grievances of the petitioners, consider and dispose of these
pvr 4 914wp6915-16.doc representations, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from today.
5.
Writ Petitions are disposed of in the above terms. No costs. (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)