Dashrath Appa Bankar v. Union Of India

4-cp657.2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CONTEMPT PETITION NO.657 OF 2024 Dashrath Appa Bankar ..Petitioner

VERSUS

Union Of India ..Respondent ---- Mr.Satish B. Talekar, Advocate a/w. Mr.Saurabh Veer and Ms.Prajakta S.B., Advocates i/b. Talekar and Associates, for petitioner Mr.Vijay Killedar, Advocate a/w. Mr.Shivraj Jagadale, Advocate for respondent no.1 - U.O.I.

Mr.V.M.Mali, AGP for respondent no.2 Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate (through V.C.) with Mr.A.M.Kotimbire and Ms.A.P.Gharge, Advocates (personally) for respondents - N.H.A.I. ---- CORAM : R. G. AVACHAT & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

DATE : FEBRUARY 16, 2026 ORDER :- Heard.

2.

Pursuant to the directions issued by this court on the last occasion, Mr.Keshav Ghodke, an Oicer of the respondents - National Highways Authority of India is present (through V.C.). His presence is marked and dispensed with.

3.

Mr.Talekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions seeks leave to withdraw the Contempt Petition with liberty to prosecute the appropriate proceedings for the relief which the

4-cp657.2024 petitioner wants including issuance of award, grant of compensation, enhancement, etc. He submits that the petitioner has prayed for the direction to the respondents - authorities to pass fresh award under Section 3G of the National Highways Act. However, he submits that since the petition is being withdrawn by the petitioner, the petitioner may be granted liberty to take out appropriate proceedings available to him as per the law.

4.

Mr.Talekar, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the amount deposited by the respondents authorities is not disbursed to the petitioner. He was at pains to ventilate his grievance that the petitioner was verbally asked by the concerned authorities to execute an undertaking that he shall not claim any other compensation nor shall claim any award in future. He submits that the petitioner's right cannot be forfeited by compelling him to ile such undertaking.

5.

Mr.Singh, learned counsel for respondent - N.H.A.I., states that the amount is already deposited with respondent no.4 - Competent Authority, Land Acquisition (C.A.L.A.), Sub-Divisional Oicer, Akluj. Both learned counsel for the respondents deny to have ever insisted the petitioner to execute an undertaking, as alleged. According to them, the petitioner was served with a notice

4-cp657.2024 to come and receive the amount of compensation. Mr.Mali, learned AGP makes a statement that the amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner immediately.

6.

In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. The statements of respondent - N.H.A.I. and C.A.L.A. are taken on record. [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [R.G. AVACHAT, J.] ...........

KBP