Barku Ananda Sangale And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary And ORS

8-wp-13597-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13597 OF 2022 Barku Ananda Sangale & Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

---- Mr.Vikas Somawanshi h/f Mr.Vaibhav V. Ugle for the Petitioners. Ms.Kavita N. Solunke, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2-State. ---- CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA & NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date: 2022.11.30 10:23:49 +0530 S.G. DIGE, JJ.

DATE : 28 NOVEMBER 2022 P.C:- .

Rule. The learned AGP waives service for all Respondents. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

2.

By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India, the Petitioners seek writ of mandamus against the Respondent No.3 to pass an award as per the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and pay the compensation for acquired land as per the market value report 2021-2022 and for other consequential reliefs. N.S. Kamble page 1 of 2

8-wp-13597-2022.doc 3.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the representation made by his clients on 23 May 2022 to the learned Collector, Nashik be directed to decide the representation expeditiously. The statement is accepted. 4.

The Collector, Nashik is directed to dispose of the said representation (Exhibit-E) of the Petition within eight weeks from the date of the communication of this order and shall communicate the order to the Petitioner within one week from the date of the passing of such order.

5.

If the said representation is decided in favour of the Petitioners, consequential reliefs be granted to the Petitioners as permissible in law within six weeks thereafter. 6.

If the representation of the Petitioners is decided against the Petitioners they would be at liberty to file appropriate proceedings permissible in law.

7.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view on the merits of the representation made by the Petitioners. All contentions of the parties are kept open. (S.G. DIGE, J.) (R.D. DHANUKA, J.) N.S. Kamble page 2 of 2