1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2751 OF 2005 Ananda T. Nabge ....Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2798 OF 2005 Dattatraya Hanumantrao Chavan ....Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents IN BOTH PETITIONS: Mr. P.N. Joshi for the Petitioners Mr. R.D. Rane, Additional Government Pleader, for the State. CORAM: DALVEER BHANDARI, C.J., & S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE: APRIL 29, 2005. P.C. 1. Rule . Mr. R.D. Rane, the learned Additional Government Pleader, waives service of the Rule on behalf of the State. By consent, the Rule in both these petitions is made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing. 2. By these petitions, the petitioners are seeking a very limited relief, 2 whereby the petitioners' applications, which are pending before the second respondent – Collector, Pune – under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (“the Act”, for short), may be decided expeditiously. It appears that pertaining to the Notification, which covers the lands involved in these petitions, on 31st August, 2000 and 31st October, 2000, respectively, the Reference Court granted enhanced compensation. Based on the same, the applications were filed under Section 28-A of the Act in November, 2000 and January, 2001, respectively. 3. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we direct respondent No.2 - Collector, Pune – to decide the said applications for enhancement of compensation under Section 28-A of the Act as expeditiously as possible, but preferably, within four months from the date of receipt of this order. While doing so, the second respondent shall take into account the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Mangatu Ram, reported in AIR 1997 SC 704. 4. No further directions are necessary. Rule in these petitions is made absolute in the above terms. These writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. 3 CHIEF JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE, J.