Mr. Sudhakar S/O. Vanraj Paraskar And Others v. State Of Maha., Through Principal Secretary Jal Sampada And Land Acquisition Dept., Mumbai And Othe

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.388/2016 Mr. Sudhakar s/o Vanraj Paraskar and others ...Versus...

State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary Jal Sampada & Land Acquisition Department, 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 S.S. Sarda, Advocate for petitioners Shri J.Y. Ghurde, AGP for respondents CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : 03.08.2016 By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction against the respondents to pay interest to the petitioners on the amount of compensation under the provisions of Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Shri Ghurde, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents raises a preliminary objection to the tenability of the writ petition. It is stated that by this writ petition, the petitioners have sought a mandamus against the respondents to pay interest to the petitioners under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is stated that the writ of mandamus could be sought only when a party makes a demand and his request or demand is either rejected or the same is ignored. It is stated that in the instant case,

the petitioners had never made any representation or application to the respondents to grant interest to the petitioners under Section 34 of the Act.

We find much force in the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents, as it is well settled that before seeking a mandamus, a party would be required to make a demand or a request for the performance of the duty in respect of the right of the petitioner and if the demand is not accepted, the party is entitled to approach the Court seeking a writ of mandamus.

Shri Sarda, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, states that the petitioners would make a representation to the respondents, within two weeks and if the respondents fail to consider the representation favourably or they do not decide it within a reasonable time, the petitioners would then approach this Court.

In view of the statement made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs. The points raised in the petition are kept open. JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar

C E R T I F I C A T E I certify that this order uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed order.

Uploaded by : S.S. Wadkar, P.S. Uploaded on : 05/08/2016