Shri. Baban Baburao Umap v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary, Rehabilitation And ORS.

1 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc Sequeira IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13561 OF 2016 Mr.Maruti Vithoba Hargude and another.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 13513 OF 2016 Mr.Baban Baburao Umap.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14163 OF 2016 Mr.Nilakh Laxman Pandharinath and anr.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14162 OF 2016 Mr.Vikram Mahadu Yewale.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

2 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14158 OF 2016 Mr.Laxman Genbhau Shivale.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14165 OF 2016 Mr.Ravindra Kisan Nilakh.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14159 OF 2016 Mr.Dattatraya Baban Narke.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 1583 OF 2017 Mr.Ramchandra Vitthal Gadhave and ors.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 8902 OF 2017

3 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc Mr.Ramdas Dagdoba Dhamdhere and anr.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 12636 OF 2017 Mr.Shivaji Babanrao Bhosure and another.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 17173 OF 2017 Mr.Eknath Nivrutti Dafal and ors.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 19841 OF 2017 Mr.Kisan alias Krishna Kondiba Dherange.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 13970 OF 2017 Mr.Anandrao Sitaram Gaikwad.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

4 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 13562 OF 2016 Mr.Kaluram Damu Umap.

... Petitioner.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 13557 OF 2016 Mr.Sudarshan Dashrath Domale and another.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14164 OF 2016 Ms.Rasika Chandrakant Shelke and others ... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Along with WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 17171 OF 2017 Mr.Suresh Shankar Dafal and others.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Mr.Swapnil Mohite, for the Petitioner in W.P. (St.) No.7603 of 2017.

5 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Mr.Omkar Amberkar, for the Petitioner in W.P. (St.)No.13970 of 2017; W.P. No.14158 of 2016; W.P. No.14159 of 2016; W.P. No.14161 of 2016; W.P. No.14162 of 2016; W.P. No.14163 of 2016; W.P. No.14164 of 2016; W.P. No.14165 of 2016; W.P. (St.) No.19841 of 2017; W.P.(St.) No.8902 of 2017. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Rewa Nargolkar, for the Petitioner in W.P. (St.) No.12636 of 2017, W.P. (St.) 1583 of 2017.

Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Lendl Coutinho, for the Petitioner in W.P. No.13513 of 2016, W.P. No.13557 of 2016, W.P. No.13562 of 2016. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, for the Petitioner in W.P. (St.) No.17173 of 2017, W.P. (St.) No.17171 of 2017.

Mr.A.B.Vagyani - GP a/w Mr.P.G.Sawant - AGP a/w Ms.Geetanjali Golatkar - AAGP & Mr.Rohan Sawant - AAGP, for Respondent - State.

CORAM : DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J.

DATE : OCTOBER 3, 2017.

P.C. :- In this group of matters, since a common question of law arises, identical facts are involved and the reliefs claimed is the same, by consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Petitions are disposed of by this common order. The learned counsel for the parties have also advanced common submissions. 2.

The Petitioners have filed the Petitions under Article 226

6 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc of Constitution of India seeking relief under section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('Act of 2013'). They seek a declaration that acquisition proceedings have lapsed. 3.

The lands involved in these Petitions have been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the resettlement of project affected persons. The resettlement of project affected persons is carried out under the provisions of Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act 1999. Notifications under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were issued, thereafter followed by declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, Awards in all these proceedings were declared five years prior to 1 January 2014. 4.

Since relief is sought under section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, it will be necessary to reproduce the said section for ready reference5.

Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 reads thus :- "24. Land acquisition process under Act No. 1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases-

(1) .............

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,

7 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc where an award under the said Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act;

Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of landholdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under Section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act."

Thus, three parameters are indicated in Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. First, the award should be published five years prior to the date of commencement of the Act, which date is 1 January 2014. Second, the physical possession of the land is not taken. Third, the compensation is not paid.

6.

In all the Petitions, the State has asserted that State has taken possession of the lands in question. In some cases the State has placed on record that possession has been handed over to project affected persons.

7.

However in the case of Santosh Dnyaneshwar Aher v/s.

8 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary & Ors.1 Division Bench of this Court has taken a view that for application of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, it is enough that either of the contingencies exist. That is, the possession of the land is not taken or compensation is not paid. This position is amply made clear by the Apex Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority v/s. Sukhbir Singh and Ors.2. 8.

In all these proceedings, the State has either filed affidavits or has placed a chart on record which has been counter signed by the learned Additional Government Pleader. These documents show that the compensation has not been paid to the Petitioners and the same is deposited in Personal Ledger Account or Revenue Account. It is an admitted position that in none of these petitions, compensation has been deposited in the court where reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act will lie. 9.

The aspect of compensation as regards Section 24(2) of Act of 2013 has been dealt by the Apex Court in the cases of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v/s. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors.3 and Delhi Development Authority v/s. Sukhbir Singh and Ors. The Apex Court analyzed the provision of Section 24 of the Act of 2013 and Section 31 of the Act of 1894. It was held that Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, which envisages deposit of

1. Writ Petition No. 3238 of 2015 dtd 17/01/2017

2. AIR 2016 SCC 4275.

3. 2014(4) Mh. L.J.566

9 sr.4 WP 13561-16 wt group....doc compensation in the Court, is a mandatory provision. As per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, if the compensation is not accepted or collected by the Claimant, the compensation has to be deposited by the Collector in the Court where the reference can be made under Section 18 of the Act of 1894. The Apex Court construed the phrase "compensation has not been paid " occurring in Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 as being "paid" as per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894. The Apex Court laid down that if the compensation is not paid as per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, then Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 is attracted and consequences of lapsing of acquisition contemplated under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, will ensue. This view has been followed in subsequent decisions by the Apex Court and the Division Benches of this Court. 10.

In the result, the contention of the Petitioners that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed since the compensation is not paid as per Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, will have to be upheld.

11.

Accordingly, Writ petitions are allowed holding that the Land Acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands in question have lapsed by virtue of section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. Writ Petitions are disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs.

N.M. JAMDAR, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE