Dnyaneshwar Rangarao Dandge v. Shri. I.S. Chahal And Others
cps283.284.285.286.19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.283 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1517 OF 2019 (D) Sakharam S/o Shamrao Shingne.
Vs.
Shri I. S. Chahal, Secretary, Irrigation Department State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya Mumbai and others.
WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO.284 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1425 OF 2019 (D) Haribhau S/o Balwanta Shingne.
Vs.
Shri I. S. Chahal, Secretary, Irrigation Department State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya Mumbai and others.
WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO.285 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1730 OF 2019 (D) Dnyaneshwar S/o Rangrao Dandge.
Vs.
Shri I. S. Chahal, Secretary, Irrigation Department State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya Mumbai and others.
WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO.286 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1046 OF 2019 (D) Ruprao S/o Martandrao Deshmukh (Dandge) Vs.
Shri I. S. Chahal, Secretary, Irrigation Department State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya Mumbai and others.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'
s or Judge'
s orders appearances, Court'
s orders of directions and Registrar'
s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri R. N. Ghuge, Advocate for petitioners.
Shri A. S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader with Shri S. Bissa, AGP for respondents.
cps283.284.285.286.19 CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : NOVEMBER 15, .
The grievance made by the petitioners in these contempt petitions is that in terms of the directions issued by this Court in the respective writ petitions filed by the petitioners, the proceedings under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were not decided though directed.
Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondents in which it has been stated that on 06.11.2019 award under Section 28-A of the said has been passed.
Shri R. N. Ghuge, learned counsel for the petitioners however submits that the determination of the amount of compensation under Section 28-A of the said Act is incorrect. Correctness of the award passed under Section 28-A cannot be examined in contempt jurisdiction. The petitioners are free to challenge the award dated 06.11.2019, if they are not satisfied with the quantum of compensation. Accordingly, the Contempt Petitions are disposed of as the order stands complied with. JUDGE Sarkate