Govindrao Ramrao Korde And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1942 OF 2019 1.

Govindrao Ramrao Korde Age: 66 years, Occu. Agri.

Prashant Samadhan Korde Age: 26 years, Occu. Agri.

Ganesh Tukaram Korde Age: 40 years, Occu. Agri.

Bhagwan Tukaram Korde Suresh Tukaram Korde Age: 37 years, Occu. Agri.

6.

Pandurang Ganpat Korde 7.

Raosaheb Himmatrao Korde Age: 50 years, Occu. Agri.

8.

Ramrao Ananda Korde Age: 75 years, Occu. Agri.

(2) 9.

Eknath Kaduba Korde Age: 53 years, Occu. Agri.

10.

Tukaram Devrao Korde (Ganesh Tukaram Korde) Age: 40 years, Occu. Agri.

11.

Shamrao Namdevrao Korde Age: 72 years, Occu. Agri.

12.

Laxman Namdevrao Korde Age: 24 years, Occu. Agri.

13.

Digambar Sitaram Korde 14.

Vitthal Sitaram Korde Age: 40 years, Occu. Agri.

15.

Sitaram Bandu Korde Age: 66 years, Occu. Agri.

16.

Sukhdev Paraji Gadhe Age: 59 years, Occu. Agri.

17.

Baburao Sakhraji Gadhe Age: 57 years, Occu. Agri.

(3) 18.

Vilas Sukhdev Korde 19.

Rangubai Sukhdev Korde Age: 62 years, Occu. Agri.

20.

Sadashiv Sonuba Gadhe Age: 63 years, Occu. Agri.

21.

Bhagaji Sonuba Gadhe Age: 59 years, Occu. Agri.

..PETITIONERS

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra Through Department of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

The Collector, Jalna Sub Divisional Officer, Bhokardan, Tal. Bhokardan, District Jalna Executive Engineer PWD Division , (Mahura-Rajur Ganpati State Highway Section), PWD, Jalna Tahsildar, Bhokardan, District Jalna ..RESPONDENTS Mr D.P. Palodkar, Advocate for petitioner;

Mrs R.P. Gaur, A.G.P. for respondents CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE

(4) AND S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 15th February, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr Palodkar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.

The petitioners are the land owners in general and agriculturists in particular. The respondents authorities exercising the powers under various Acts initiated project of widening and construction of State Highway No.226.

Mr Palodkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted before this Court that the petitioners are not causing any hindrance in the proposed widening and construction road work as this being the developmental activity, but their only anxiety is of receiving fair compensation to the lands of these petitioners, if acquired by following due procedure of law. On the backdrop of this limited grievance, the learned Counsel invited our attention to the representation submitted to the authorities, namely, Collector, SubDivisional Officer, Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Division and Tahsildar, Bhokardan, dated 21st November, 2018. A copy of the same is placed on record at Exh.D. The details are provided in the

(5) representation/notice of the petitioners and the anxiety as expressed by the Counsel is also stated in the notice/representation. Learned Counsel invited our attention to a communication forwarded from the Land Acquisition Officer to the competent authority. This communication refers to the earlier application submitted to the authority through one Shri Digambar Sitaram Korde. Mr Palodkar, on instructions submitted that all these petitioners have also submitted similar applications as like Shri Digambar Sitaram Korde. It was informed to the competent authority by communication dated 6th July, 2017 about the receipt of the application and the action taken report was sought for.

Learned Counsel submits that as the subsequent application/representation dated 21st November, 2018 is still pending for decision in spite of the earlier exchange of communication between the Land Acquisition Officer and the competent authority, directions be issued to the respondents authorities to decide the representation/notice expeditiously. The aforesaid being a limited grievance and prayer, the petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage and accordingly we dispose of the petition with directions to respondent nos.

(6) date of the order of this Court, needless to state on the merits of the notice/representation.

6.

All contentions raised in the petition are kept open. 7.

With aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of. (S.M. GAVHANE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) amj