Ragho Jayram Patil Decd Throu. L.H. And ORS v. The Land Acquisitiion Officer Alias Sub Divisional Officer Ulhasnagar And ORS

bipin prithiani 23-wp-2076.26.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2076 OF 2026 Ragho Jayram Patil decd. through L.H. & Ors.

...

Petitioners

Versus

The Land Acquisition Officer alias Sub-Divisional Officer, Ulhasnagar & Ors.

...

Respondents ****** Mr. Dilip B. Shinde a/w Mr. Vinay Chavan for the Petitioners. Mrs. Tanu N. Bhatia, AGP for Respondent-State. DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2026.02.16 17:42:00 +0530 BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI ****** CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.

DATE : 16th FEBRUARY 2026 P.C. :

.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

2.

The principal prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent No.1 i.e. Land Acquisition Officer to refer dispute or objection raised by the petitioners to the competent authority, as contemplated under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

3.

The documents filed with the writ petition do not show any such application filed by the petitioners in terms of Section 64 of the aforesaid Act. It is to be noted that under Section 64 of the aforesaid Act, such an application for referring the matter to the authority is to be made within six weeks from the date of award.

bipin prithiani 23-wp-2076.26.doc The proviso to Section 64(2) of the said Act specifies that the Collector may entertain such an application after the expiry of period of six weeks, within a further period of one year, if the Collector is satisfied that sufficient cause is made out. 4.

Along with this petition, neither a copy of the award nor copy of any application preferred by the petitioners has been placed on record. We are unable to appreciate the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners in that backdrop. 5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners made an attempt to convince this Court by alleging that another similarly situated person/brother of the petitioners had moved an application and that the petitioners had applied for being joined as parties therein. The documents pertaining to such purported proceeding are also not on record.

6.

In such a situation, we are unable to appreciate the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners. 7.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks time to place on record relevant documents.

8.

An additional affidavit along with documents may be filed within one week from today.

9.

List this petition under the same category on 27th February 2026.

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