1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2127 OF 2009 1. Maruti Jagu Tarange | 2. Pandurang Maruti Tarange | 3. Gulab Bhaguji Bhise | 4. Kasabai Maruti Jadhav | 5. Bhagwan Hariba Jadhav | .. .. Petitioners. 6. Bapu Sopan Tarange All Adults, Occ. Agriculturists, | R/a. Indapur, Tal. Indapur, Dist.Pune.| V/s. 1.The Special Land Acquisition Officer | No.13, Pune | New Prashaskiya Imarat, 2nd floor, | Collectors Office Compound, Pune | Through Govt. Pleader’s office. | 2.The Collector, Pune, | Collectors Compound, Pune. | 3.Commissioner, Pune | .. Respondents. Commissioner Office, Pune-1, | through G.P.’s office. | --- Mr. G. K. Maurya with Ms. Pallavi Potnis for the Petitioners. Mr. V.S. Masurkar, GP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. --- CORAM : V. C. DAGA AND A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 12TH OCTOBER, 2009 PC : 1. The above petition has been filed by the petitioners, 2 essentially to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to decide their applications under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as expeditiously as possible, preferably in a time bound schedule. 2. In a similar matter, being writ petition no. 164 of 2009 in the case of Laxman M. Gawari & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors., by judgment and order dated 15th September, 2009 passed by us (V.C.Daga and A.A.Sayed,JJ.), we have considered the very issue and passed a reasoned order, placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Babua Ram vs. State of UP, (1995) 2 SCC 689 and recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Kendriya Karamchari Sehkari Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd., vs. State of U.P. (2009) 1 SCC 754. For the reasons mentioned in the said order dated 15th September, 2009, we pass the following order in this petition:- ORDER i. The respondent no. 1 shall ascertain if there is any appeal filed by the Govt. or acquiring body against the judgment and order of the Civil Judge, SD, Pune in the Land Reference/s; ii. If there is no appeal filed/ pending, the respondent no. 1 shall proceed to decide the Applications filed by the petitioners under section 28-A in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Apex Court in the above quoted judgments by taking necessary affidavits from the 3 petitioners. This exercise will be carried out by the respondent no. 1 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order, after issuing notice to the acquiring body even if they are not party to the Applications under section 28-A of the Act. Needless to say that the Respondent No.1 shall decide the Applications by reasoned order following principles of natural justice; iii. In the event there is an appeal pending, the respondent no.1 shall accordingly inform the petitioners that in view of the pendency of the appeal the Applications of the petitioners are kept pending and will be decided within three months from the decision of the appeal; iv. It will however be open to the Respondent no.1 to reject any application under section 28-A on the ground of it being time barred, notwithstanding pendency of the appeal; 3. The petition to stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No order as to costs. 4. Learned GP to communicate this order to the Respondent No.1. (V.C.DAGA, J.) (A.A. SAYED,J.)