Sau. Mandakini Bhaskarrao Jeevankar v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, Revenue And Forest Deptt., Mumbai And Others

2206mca564.16 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.564 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6216 OF 2015 (Sau. Mandakini Bhaskarrao Jeevankar vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Shri U. Dastane, Advocate for applicant.

Shri N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.

------- CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : JUNE 22, 2016 Prayer is to review order dated 29/3/2016 passed in Writ Petition No.6216/2015.

Adv. Dastane for applicant/petitioner submits that in view of express language of Section 24(1) read with Section 64 of the Right of Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, entitlement of applicant/petitioner to benefits of rehabilitation need to be considered and for that purpose, Reference must be made to Authority under Section 64(1) of the said Act.

With the assistance of learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioner, we have perused provisions

2206mca564.16 2/2 of Section 24(1)(a) and (b) of the said Act. The provision contained in Section 24(1)(b) operates when award has already been made. In the present matter, award was not made before coming into force of 2013 Act, with the result, controversy is covered by Section 24(1)(a), which stipulates that provisions of new Act only in relation to determination of compensation apply to such proceedings. It is, therefore, obvious that no other provision of 2013 Act can be looked into.

The miscellaneous civil application is misconceived and hence, the same is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE khj