Bombay High CourtWP/2260/2015dismissedrule discharged

Vaijayanti Wd/O Balkrishna Kale v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary, Urban Development Department And 3 Others

2016-04-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Shri Justice P.N. Deshmukh2 pages

1 2704wp2260.15.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.2260 OF 2015 Vaijayanti wd/o Balkrishna Kale ..vs.. The State of Mah. & ors. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.A.A.Naik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mrs.M.S.Naik, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3.

Mr.Tapdiya, Advocate for respondent no.4.

CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI AND P.N.DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATED : APRIL 27, 2016.

Heard.

Effort of Advocate Shri A. Naik is to demonstrate that the award and acquisition itself has lapsed in view of provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

We need not go into relevant dates as Advocate Shri Tapdiya appearing for respondent no.4 has invited attention to the judgment delivered by this Court on 6th of May, 2015 in Writ Petition No.440 of 2014 and Writ Petition No.6928 of 2014, wherein it has been held that those provisions contained in Section 24(2) of the Act do not apply to the acquisitions under special enactment like present one i.e. Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966.

2 2704wp2260.15.odt In view of this judgment, which clinches the issue, we dismiss Writ Petition.

No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Chute.