Shreeji Investments Llp v. Land Acquisition Rehabilitation And Settlement Authority At Aurangabad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1467 OF 2026 Shreeji Investments LLP

...Petitioner

Versus

Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Settlement Authority at Aurangabad and Others

...Respondents

VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR ****** Mr. Yogesh Naidu i/b. Ms. Deepa Bopardikar, for the Petitioner Dr. Milind Sathye, Advocate General a/w. Ms. Anjali Helekar, GP and Mr. Manish Upadhye, AGP, for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. ******

CORAM

: MANISH PITALE AND VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2026.06.15 18:06:50 +0530 SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.

DATE : 15th JUNE, 2026 P.C. :

1.

On 2nd April, 2026 this Court had passed a detailed order. While issuing notice, this Court had also directed to list other petitions raising similar issues.

2.

The grievance of the petitioner pertains to an inordinate delay in consideration and disposal of the proceedings before the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Settlement Authority (LARR) under section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

3.

Although an opportunity was granted, the respondent-State has ....1

not filed reply affidavit. Learned Advocate General had appeared on behalf of respondent- State and he reiterates that the issue regarding the appointment of three additional Members to LARR at Nashik, Amaravati and Aurangabad is pending on the administrative side of this Court.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition can be disposed of by granting prayer clause (a), (b1) and (b2), which have been added by way of amendment alternatively seeking transfer of the petitioner's case pending before LARR at Pune to the Bench at Nashik. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the Presiding Officer of LARR at Nashik visits Pune for circuit sitting and considering the pendency of the huge number of matters at Pune, it would be in the interest of justice that the petitioner's case is transferred to the Nashik Bench for expeditious disposal.

5.

The State does not have any specific objection to the said prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. We are also of the opinion that since the sitting of the bench at Nashik is a regular bench sitting, there is likelihood of the petitioner's case being taken up expeditiously for disposal.

....2

6.

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed and disposed of in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b1) and (b2), which read as follows: (a) This Court be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order or direction in the nature of mandamus and direct the respondent No. 1 to expeditiously hear and decide the petitioner's dispute being case No. 2022/LARRAA/KOK/MUM-C/2155 and in any event within a time bound period.

(b1) Till appropriate appointment and/or transfer of the case No. 2022/LARRA-A/KOK/MUM-C/2155 is effected, this authority be pleased to pass necessary directions for placing the matter before the bench at Nashik, so as to secure expeditious hearing and disposal of the petitioner's case. (b2) Upon transfer/ placement of the case No.2022/LARRAA/KOK/MUM-C/2155 before the Nashik Bench, the same be proceeded with on a fortnightly basis, without granting unnecessary adjournment to the parties.

7.

The papers pertaining to the case of the petitioner shall be immediately transferred to the Bench at Nashik and the said bench is directed to make an endevour to dispose of the petitioner's case as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months from the date of this order.

8.

Resultantly, the parties are directed to appear before the LARR at Nashik Bench on 22nd June, 2026.

(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) ....3