Magas Samaj Seva Mandal Through Its President Ramdas Jaysingh Chavan v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others
2025:BHC-AUG:20340-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 945 WRIT PETITION NO. 8319 OF 2025 Magas Samaj Seva Mandal Through Its President Ramdas Jaysingh Chavan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others AND 950 WRIT PETITION NO. 8326 OF 2025 Shantabai Dnyanoba Bansode
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others AND 951 WRIT PETITION NO. 8327 OF 2025 Ramdas Jaysingh Chavan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others AND WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 15505 OF 2025 Ramdas Jaysingh Chavan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others ...
Shaikh Mazhar A. Jahagirdar, Advocate for the Petitioners Mrs. S.S. Joshi, Mrs. V. M. Kagne, Mr. R. K. Ingole, AGPs for Respondents State .....
CORAM
: MANISH PITALE & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE : 30th July, 2025 P. C. :
1.
Writ Petition Stamp No. 1550 of 2025 is taken on board as connected writ petitions have been listed today for consideration.
2.
The Petitioners in these petitions claim that while possession of their respective lands was taken in order to rehabilitate the persons who suffered due to earthquake in District Latur, no compensation was paid although such possession was taken as far back as in the year 1993.
3.
The document on record i.e. public notice dated 14.10.2022 shows that Respondent No.3 invited claims from such aggrieved persons. In fact, it was recorded that lands were acquired for rehabilitation purpose in the year 1993, awards were pronounced under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and compensation was also paid to those persons whose lands were acquired. Yet, such complaints were being received.
4.
It is the case of the petitioners that in response to the public notice dated 14.10.2022, they immediately approached Respondent No.3 and placed their claims on record alongwith copies of relevant documents. Till date, no steps have been taken in that regard. 5.
Learned AGPs appear on behalf of all the respondents. 6.
In view of the above, we are of the opinion that since Respondent No.3 itself issued public notice inviting claims of aggrieved persons like the petitioners, to which they have responded, it is the bounden duty of Respondent No.3 to proceed further in the matter and take appropriate action.
7.
The writ petitions are disposed of by directing Respondent No.3 to consider the claims made by the petitioners in pursuance of public notice dated 14.10.2022 and to take further action in accordance with law, if such grievance has not already been decided. 8.
It is directed that Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 shall take appropriate action in the matter as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within two months from today.
( Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ) ( MANISH PITALE, J. ) JPChavan