The State Of Mah. v. Pandit Jayram Patil

2024:BHC-AUG:23235

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1043 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1345 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

TRAMBAK BHIVSAN PATIL AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1342 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

PANDIT JAYRAM PATIL AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1353 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

DIGAMBAR DAGA CHOUDHARI AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1348 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

UTTAM MARTAND PATIL AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1343 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

DHANRAJ SUKDEO PATIL AND

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1344 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

BHAGCHAND DIPCHAND AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1346 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

RAMESH AVJI MAHARU AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1350 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

BHIKAN DAJIBA MOHITE AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1341 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

SURESHGIR KESHAVGIR GOSAVI AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1351 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

YAMUNABAI WAMAN PATIL AND FIRST APPEAL NO. 1349 OF 2007 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

VERSUS

ASHOK PATILBUWA PATIL

....

CORAM

: ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

Dated : September 27, 2024 PER COURT :- 1.

Present appeals are preferred by the State/appellant against the common judgment and order dated 28.09.2000 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in different Land Acquisition References.

2.

In the instant cases, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has granted compensation to the claimants and the the Reference Court has enhanced the same which is not more than four times. The learned AGP agrees with this position.

3.

The Government has notified the Government Resolutions dated 3rd November, 2016 and 23rd February, 2017. In the aforesaid Government Resolutions, the State has taken a policy decision, not to challenge the award wherein the increase in compensation is not more than two times in the city/urban area and not more than four times in rural areas. The State has also accepted the same in the pending appeals also. In the instant cases, if the award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer is considered, the enhancement by the reference court is within four times. If the aforesaid Government resolutions are applied to the present appeals filed by the State, the appeals would not be tenable.

4.

In view of the discussion made above, I hold that there is no merit in the appeals filed by the State as they are not tenable in view of the aforesaid Government Resolutions. In the result, the first appeals filed by the State are dismissed.

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) ssc/