Bhagwan Dattatray Aswale And ORS v. The Government Of India And ORS
ppn
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2025.04.24 17:59:48 +0530 PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR
(501) WRIT PETITION NO. 12952 OF 2022 Trambak Chotu Pawar (since decd.) through his legal heir ... Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
... Respondents ______________________________________________________ Mr Pratik B. Rahade, for Petitioner.
Mr B. V. Samant, Addl. G.P. a/w Ms. M. S. Bane, AGP for the State.
______________________________________________________ WITH
(502) WRIT PETITION NO. 4139 OF 2024 Bhagwan Dattatray Aswale & Ors.
... Petitioners
Versus
The Govt. of India & Ors.
... Respondents ______________________________________________________ Mr Vinit P. Ahuja (through VC) i/by Mr. Prakash J. Ahuja, for Petitioners.
Mr B. V. Samant, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the State.
______________________________________________________ CORAM : M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.
DATED : 17 APRIL 2025 PC (M.S. Sonak, J.):- 1.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2.
Rule in each of these petitions. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3.
Since common issue of law and facts arise in these petitions, learned counsel for the parties agreed that a common order can dispose of the petitions.
4.
The petitioners, in effect, claim the benefits of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Tarsem Singh and Ors.1 Learned counsel for the parties agreed that the issue is covered by the decision in the case of Tarsem Singh and Ors. (supra) as modified by the order dated 30 July 2021 made in Miscellaneous Application Diary No.2572 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No.7086 of 2019.
5.
Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected even the review against the decision in Tarsem Singh and Ors. (supra) vide its order dated 4 February 2025 disposing of MCA No.1773 of 2021 in Civil Appeal No.7064 of 2019. 6.
Therefore, the following decision in the case of Tarsem Singh and Ors. (supra) read with the other orders referred to above, we dispose of all these petitions by directing the respondents, including particularly, NHAI to compute and pay the petitioners solatium and interest in accordance with the principles and the directions issued in Tarsem Singh and Ors. (supra) within three months of uploading this order. 1 (2019) 9 SCC 304
7.
The respondents must comply without delay, and all benefits must be paid to the petitioners within three months of this order being uploaded.
8.
The authorities must verify the petitioners' entitlement status and then pay statutory benefits. This is because Mr. Samant points out that some of the parties in whose favour the awards herein have been made, and who have received the initial compensation amount, might have expired, making it necessary for the claimant to establish the lineage of such a person.
9.
In similar circumstances, by an order dated 8 April 2025. We adopt the reasoning in the said order for disposing of this batch of petitions.
10.
The rule is accordingly made absolute in all these writ petitions under the above terms without any cost order. All concerned are to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (Jitendra Jain, J) (M.S. Sonak, J)