Poslya Bhika Kokani And Another v. The Govt. Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:35823-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 905 WRIT PETITION NO. 12055 OF 2025 Mustak Ahamad Harun Sha 906 WRIT PETITION NO. 12056 OF 2025 Gorakh Gunja Thelari And Others 907 WRIT PETITION NO. 12057 OF 2025 Dinesh Ramesh Patil 908 WRIT PETITION NO. 12058 OF 2025 Lahu Pandit More 909 WRIT PETITION NO. 12059 OF 2025 Dagadu Dhanaji Bhil 910 WRIT PETITION NO. 12060 OF 2025 Bhika Kalu Thorat 911 WRIT PETITION NO. 12061 OF 2025 Sunil Nimba Thakare And Others 912 WRIT PETITION NO. 12062 OF 2025 Gotu Tandu Kokani And Others 913 WRIT PETITION NO. 12063 OF 2025 Bhiva Mitaji Thorat And Another 914 WRIT PETITION NO. 12064 OF 2025 [1]

Dharma Mahadu Thelari And Others The Union Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others 915 WRIT PETITION NO. 12065 OF 2025 Nitin Vitthal Chaudhary The Union Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others 916 WRIT PETITION NO. 12066 OF 2025 Devman Dhavadu Bhil The Govt Of India Through the Deputy Secretary And Others 917 WRIT PETITION NO. 12068 OF 2025 Gajanan Chila Kokani 918 WRIT PETITION NO. 12069 OF 2025 Yashwant Bhila Sonawane 945 WRIT PETITION NO. 12121 OF 2025 Rajesh Kuwarsing Kuwar And Another The Union Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others 946 WRIT PETITION NO. 12124 OF 2025 Poslya Bhika Kokani And Another 949 WRIT PETITION NO. 12127 OF 2025 Bhanudas Vasave Died His Lrs Sumitra Bhanudas Vasave And Others The Govt Of India Throgh The Deputy Secretary And Others 959 WRIT PETITION NO. 12173 OF 2025 Abdul Mannan Abdul Sattar The Union Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others 960 WRIT PETITION NO.12174 OF 2025 Mohd. Husain Ahmed Abbas Ansari The Union Of India Through The Deputy Secretary And Others 961 WRIT PETITION NO. 12175 OF 2025 [2]

Ramesh Lalaji Amrutsagar And Another 962 WRIT PETITION NO. 12176 OF 2025 Gulab Sopan Gawade And Others ...

Advocates for the petitioners in respective petitions :- Mr. Vikrant P. Raje, Mr. D. S. Bagul and Mr. S. A. Kulkarni and Ms. R. L. Jakhade. AGPs for respondents/State in respective petitions :- Mr. N. S. Tekale, Mr. V. M. Kagne, Mr. R. S. Wani and Mr. A. M. Phule.

Senior Panel Advocate/Central Government Counsel for respondents/Union of India in respective petitions :- Ms. Mayuri Kasturkar, Mr. Rohit Sarvadnya, Mr. S. W. Munde, Mr. N. T. Bhagat, Mr. Krushna Salunke, Mr. U. B. Bondar, Mr. Rahul Bagul, Mr. N. U. Yadav, Mr. R. R. Bangar, Mr. N. S. Salunke, Mr. M. A. Golegaonkar, Mr. N. T. Tribhuwan, Mr. Avinash Borulkar, Mr. R. D. Sanap, Mr. Rajesh Mewara and Mr. Akshay Kulkarni. Advocate for the respondent/NHAI in all the petitions :- Mr. Deepak S. Manorkar. ...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

DATE : 16 DECEMBER 2025 ORDER :

.

All the petitions raise similar issues.

2.

We have heard learned Advocates representing all the parties. 3.

Learned Advocates for the petitioners have pointed out that earlier in group of matters i.e. Writ Petition No.240 of 2023 with companion matters (Rajendra Namdev Patil and others vs. The Competent Authority Land Acquisition), this Court had passed an order on 17.07.2025. Thereafter, again in Writ Petition No.7866 of 2021 with companion matters (Shilpa Rajendra [3]

Shinve Vs. The National Highway Authority of India, Through its Project Director and another), order came to be passed on 08.08.2025, wherein order in Rajendra Namdev Patil and others (Supra) was reproduced. Even it was expressed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court that in view of the order passed in Writ Petition No.12512 of 2019 (Trimbak Aadhar Bhamre and Anr. Vs. The Union of India and others with connected writ petitions), the same relief deserves to be granted, however, it appears that from the respondent/NHAI, there were submissions. This Court then based on Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others, [(2019) 9 SCC 304], held that the petitioners would be entitled to solatium and interest on compensation amount in accordance with the principles laid down therein.

When we have also expressed our view similar to the decision that has been taken by the earlier Benches, as they are in fact based on Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others (Supra), the learned Advocate representing NHAI in all the matters have submitted that review petition has been filed by NHAI before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. By order dated 03.11.2025 (Review Petition (Civil) Diary No(s)44096 of 2025), the delay was condoned and notice has been issued. Important point to be noted is that the fact of review petition that has been filed was taken note of by this Court in Writ Petition No.

7866 of 2021 and companion matters and it was observed that mere filing of review petition would not detain this Court from disposing of the writ petitions, in the light of the fact that petitions raising identical issues have been already disposed of earlier by this Court. We are also of the same view.

petition is decided, we are governed by the decision in Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others (Supra) and, therefore, we also dispose of all the writ petitions in the following terms :- (a) In the light of above, these petitions are allowed by directing the competent authorities to compute and pay to the petitioners solatium and interest in accordance with the principles enunciated in the case of Union of India and another Vs. Tarsem Singh and others (Supra) within a period of six (6) months from today.

(b) It is made clear that the petitioners shall assist the competent authorities by producing all relevant documents and upon verification of the same, the competent authorities shall proceed further. It is also clarified that payments made pursuant to the directions given herein above, shall be subject to the challenges, if any, raised under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (c) In the light of the observations made herein above, it is further made clear that if any of the parties are aggrieved by the quantum and computation carried out by the competent authority while carrying out the directions given herein above, the remedy of Section 3G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 would be available to such aggrieved party in accordance with law. It is further made clear that the competent Authority while implementing the directions given herein above shall [5]

give reasonable hearing to all stake holders. (d) The decision would then be ultimately subject to the outcome of the review petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4.

Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. [ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE scm [6]