The State Of Maharashtra v. Hanumant Govind Pawar

2025:BHC-AUG:21000 ( 1 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 2097 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5992 OF 2010 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

VAYANKATESH MAHADEO PAWAR AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 2096 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5996 OF 2010 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

HANUMANT GOVIND PAWAR AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 2098 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5994 OF 2010 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

SANJAY KASHINATH DIGOLE AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 2099 OF 2011 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5994 OF 2010 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

SHRIDHAR MADHAVRAO PAWAR Mr. S.B. Jadhav, AGP for the appellant-State. Mr. V.V. Ingole, Advocate for the respondents-claimants.

( 2 )

CORAM

: KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 05.08.2025 PC :- 01.

All these appeals are arising out of a common judgment and award passed in LAR Nos. 849, 840 and 858 of 2005. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 08.12.1993. The land has been acquired for Sarvadi Medium Project Naichakur, Tal. Omerga. The learned Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 12,960/- per acre and also granted separate compensation for tress and structures. The learned Reference Court by way of the impugned judgment and award, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 39,000/- per acre. In LAR No. 849 of 2005 the Reference Court reduced the amount of trees and structures and independently awarded compensation for the same. 02.

In view of Government Resolution dated 03.11.2016 and Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017, the Government has taken a decision not to prefer appeal, where amount of compensation is enhanced to less than four times.

03.

In the present matters, the enhanced amount is less than four times of the amount awarded by the learned SLAO. Learned AGP also could not point of any illegality or perversity in the judgment and award. This Court finds that keeping the appeals pending is of no use. Therefore, the First Appeals are disposed off.

( 3 ) 04.

In view of disposal of the First Appeals, connected Civil Applications for stay do not survive and are disposed off accordingly. Pending Cross-objection, if any, shall be considered independently. [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] snk/2025/Aug25/fa2097.11