Bombay High CourtWP/4812/2024rule made absolute

Shri. Mahadu Bhika Muluk Decd Thru Lhrs v. The State Of Maharashtra Thru The Prin. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue And Forest And ORS

2025-04-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain , Hon'Ble Shri Justice M.S. Sonak4 pages

2025:BHC-AS:19911-DB Sayyed 15-WP.4812.2024.docx IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4812 OF 2024 WRIT PETITION NO.4812 OF 2024 Mahadu Bhika Muluk Mahadu Bhika Muluk since deceased through legal heir:

since deceased through legal heir:

1A. Parvatibai Mahadu Muluk & Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra, The State of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary, Through Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Forest & Ors.

Department of Revenue and Forest & Ors.

...Respondents

_____________________________________________________ Mr. Wasim Samlewale for the Petitioners.

Mr. Wasim Samlewale for the Petitioners.

Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a/w Ms. Shital Tanpure for Respondent Nos.4A, 4B Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a/w Ms. Shital Tanpure for Respondent Nos.4A, 4B and 4E(a).

and 4E(a).

_____________________________________________________ CORAM :

M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.

DATED : 30 April 2025 PC.:- (Per M. S. Sonak, J.) (Per M. S. Sonak, J.) 1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3.

Mr. Samlewale states that all Respondents have been served. Mr. Samlewale states that all Respondents have been served. By our order dated 3 January 2025, we clarified that this petition would By our order dated 3 January 2025, we clarified that this petition would be disposed of finally at the admission stage. Liberty was also granted to be disposed of finally at the admission stage. Liberty was also granted to the Respondents to file their affidavits by 31 January 2025. We also the Respondents to file their affidavits by 31 January 2025. We also clarified that if no affidavit is filed, we will proceed on the basis that the clarified that if no affidavit is filed, we will proceed on the basis that the Respondents have nothing further to say in this matter. Respondents have nothing further to say in this matter. 4.

The Petitioners' land had been acquired for rehabilitating The Petitioners' land had been acquired for rehabilitating project affected persons including the predecessor in title of Respondent project affected persons including the predecessor in title of Respondent

Sayyed 15-WP.4812.2024.docx No.4. Upon such acquisition, the Petitioners' land was allotted to the No.4. Upon such acquisition, the Petitioners' land was allotted to the predecessor in title of Respondent No.4. However, it was the Petitioners' predecessor in title of Respondent No.4. However, it was the Petitioners' case was that the Petitioners were never dispossessed and further, this case was that the Petitioners were never dispossessed and further, this acquisition was also acquisition was also ultra vires ultra vires and illegal.

and illegal.

The Petitioners, therefore, instituted Civil Writ Petition The Petitioners, therefore, instituted Civil Writ Petition No.1491 of 1998 in this Court. The Division Bench of this Court No.1491 of 1998 in this Court. The Division Bench of this Court disposed of this petition by order dated 4 October 2000, which reads as disposed of this petition by order dated 4 October 2000, which reads as follows:- follows:- "1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Rule. "1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Rule. Returnable forthwith. By consent, petition is taken up for hearing. Returnable forthwith. By consent, petition is taken up for hearing.

2. The proposed acquisition of the petitioners' land admeasuring 38

2. The proposed acquisition of the petitioners' land admeasuring 38 Gunthas out of Gat no.521 situated at village Chas, Taluka Khed, Gunthas out of Gat no.521 situated at village Chas, Taluka Khed, District Pune is impugned in the present petition. The learned District Pune is impugned in the present petition. The learned A.G.P. shri Sonawane very fairly conceded that the area of 38 R is A.G.P. shri Sonawane very fairly conceded that the area of 38 R is not included in the declaration issued under sec. 6 of the Land not included in the declaration issued under sec. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. The land is also not covered by Award which came Acquisition Act. The land is also not covered by Award which came to be passed by S.L.A.O. The short grievance of the petitioners is to be passed by S.L.A.O.

The short grievance of the petitioners is that without giving them any notice, and personal hearing the land that without giving them any notice, and personal hearing the land is sought to be acquired by the State Government and is being is sought to be acquired by the State Government and is being allotted to respondent no.4. As the land is not included in sec. 6 allotted to respondent no.4. As the land is not included in sec. 6 declaration and is not covered by the Award the State Government declaration and is not covered by the Award the State Government has no power to allot the same to the project affected It person. has no power to allot the same to the project affected It person. seems that 38 Gunthas has been allotted to respondent no.4 seems that 38 Gunthas has been allotted to respondent no.

4 mutation entry vide dated 1st July, 1998 bearing no. 63. We quash mutation entry vide dated 1st July, 1998 bearing no. 63. We quash and set aside the said mutation entry. We direct the District and set aside the said mutation entry. We direct the District Resettlement Officer to allot an alternate land to respondent no.4 Resettlement Officer to allot an alternate land to respondent no.4 within a period of two months.

within a period of two months.

3. Rule is made absolute on above terms. No order as to costs. Rule is made absolute on above terms. No order as to costs. 4.

4. Civil Application does not survive and hence rejected." Civil Application does not survive and hence rejected." 6.

The Petitioners state that though this Court, by the above The Petitioners state that though this Court, by the above order, quashed and set aside the mutation entry made in favour of the order, quashed and set aside the mutation entry made in favour of the predecessor in title of Respondent No.4, to date, such entry continues in predecessor in title of Respondent No.4, to date, such entry continues in the revenue records. Mr.

the revenue records. Mr. Sawant who appears for Respondent Nos.4A, Sawant who appears for Respondent Nos.4A, 4B and 4E(a) states that till date, the District Resettlement Officer has 4B and 4E(a) states that till date, the District Resettlement Officer has not allotted any alternate land to the legal representative of the not allotted any alternate land to the legal representative of the

Sayyed 15-WP.4812.2024.docx deceased of Respondent No.4. He points out that the direction was to deceased of Respondent No.4. He points out that the direction was to allot alternate land within two months on the making of the order dated allot alternate land within two months on the making of the order dated 4 October 2000.

4 October 2000.

As noted above, the State authorities have not filed a As noted above, the State authorities have not filed a response. The Petitioners assert that Respondent No. 4's original name response. The Petitioners assert that Respondent No. 4's original name continues in the survey records despite this Court's order dated 4 continues in the survey records despite this Court's order dated 4 October 2000. Similarly, Mr. Sawant asserts that no alternate land has October 2000. Similarly, Mr. Sawant asserts that no alternate land has been allotted to Respondent No. 4's legal representative to date. been allotted to Respondent No. 4's legal representative to date. 8.

The State and its officials do not appear to have bothered to The State and its officials do not appear to have bothered to implement the directions in this Court's order dated 4 October 2000. implement the directions in this Court's order dated 4 October 2000. The prejudice to the Petitioners and Respondent No.4 is indeed serious. The prejudice to the Petitioners and Respondent No.4 is indeed serious. There is no dispute about Respondent No.4 being a project-affected There is no dispute about Respondent No.4 being a project-affected person. The allotment of land to the Respondent No.4 was struck down person. The allotment of land to the Respondent No.4 was struck down by this Court, with directions to allot the Respondent No.4 alternate by this Court, with directions to allot the Respondent No.4 alternate land within two months.

This direction is still not complied with. land within two months. This direction is still not complied with. Similarly, even though the Petitioners secured a favourable order and Similarly, even though the Petitioners secured a favourable order and the mutation entry favouring the Respondent No.4 was quashed, to the mutation entry favouring the Respondent No.4 was quashed, to date, the entry in the revenue records has not been changed. date, the entry in the revenue records has not been changed. 9.

Therefore, we direct Respondent Nos 2 and 3 to do the Therefore, we direct Respondent Nos 2 and 3 to do the following within the timeline indicated below:- following within the timeline indicated below:- (a) (a) To ensure that revenue records are corrected, the name To ensure that revenue records are corrected, the name of Respondent No.4 or their legal representatives is of Respondent No.4 or their legal representatives is deleted, and the Petitioners' names are reinstated. This deleted, and the Petitioners' names are reinstated. This exercise must be completed within four weeks of exercise must be completed within four weeks of uploading this order.

uploading this order.

(b) Alternate land should be allotted to the legal (b) Alternate land should be allotted to the legal representatives of the deceased of Respondent No.4 representatives of the deceased of Respondent No.4 within three months of such Respondents appearing within three months of such Respondents appearing

Sayyed 15-WP.4812.2024.docx before Respondent No.3 and producing an authenticated before Respondent No.3 and producing an authenticated copy of this order ;

copy of this order ;

10.

The Respondent No.3 must file a compliance report in this The Respondent No.3 must file a compliance report in this Court regarding the compliance with the above two directions on or Court regarding the compliance with the above two directions on or before 31 August 2025 by giving an advance copy to the learned before 31 August 2025 by giving an advance copy to the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the legal representatives of Respondent counsel for the Petitioners and the legal representatives of Respondent No.4.

No.4.

11.

The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 must take all steps to ensure The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 must take all steps to ensure compliance, and for this purpose, if necessary, hold a meeting with the compliance, and for this purpose, if necessary, hold a meeting with the legal representatives of Respondent No.4, identify the alternate site and legal representatives of Respondent No.4, identify the alternate site and make the necessary allotment.

make the necessary allotment. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 must ensure Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 must ensure that the legal representatives of Respondent No.4 are allotted physical that the legal representatives of Respondent No.4 are allotted physical possession of the alternate land and not just an allotment letter, as was possession of the alternate land and not just an allotment letter, as was done on the previous occasion done on the previous occasion. This is without prejudice to the rights This is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the legal representatives of Respondent No.4 to and contentions of the legal representatives of Respondent No.4 to claim, damages etc.

claim, damages etc.

12.

The Rule is made absolute in the above terms without any The Rule is made absolute in the above terms without any cost order.

cost order. All concerned are to act on an authenticated copy of this All concerned are to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

order.

(Jitendra Jain, J.) (M. S. Sonak, J.) Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 02/05/2025 15:04:38