1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.38 OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3639 OF 2003 The State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Appellants v/s Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. And ors. ...Respondents Mr Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with Mr S.R. Nargolkar, AGP for Appellants. Dr V.V. Tulzapurkar i/b Mr A.M. Venekar for Respondent No.1. Mr S.R. Rajguru with Ms Purnima Awasthi for Respondent No.2. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND R.S. MOHITE JJ. DATE : 13TH JULY 2009. 2 P.C. :- 1] By this appeal, the Government of Maharashtra challenges the order dated 26th September 2003 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in writ petition No.3639 of 2003. Admitted facts are that the land was acquired compulsorily by the Government of Maharashtra for the purpose of Union of India under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. After acquiring the land, the land was transferred to the Government of India for using it for the purpose for which it was acquired. The Government of India in its turn handed over the said land to the respondent No.1 for construction of their aircraft manufacturing factory. The Government of Maharashtra wanted to recover N.A. Assessment / land revenue from the Company claiming that the ownership of the land has been transferred by the Union of India to the Company on 22nd June 1978. The case of the Government of Maharashtra was that this amounts to transfer of ownership rights in the land for 3 consideration of Rs.1/- by the Union of India to the Company. It appears that there were orders made by the authorities under the Land Revenue Code asking the Company to pay non-agricultural assessment / land revenue for the land. Those orders were challenged in writ petition No.3639 of 2003 by the Company before the learned Single Judge. That petition came to be disposed off by order dated 26th September 2003. The learned Single Judge held that the document referred to above does not result in sale of the land in favour of the Company. It appears from the order that the contention was raised before the learned Single Judge that the document amounts to grant of the land in favour of the Company and therefore the Company is liable to pay non-agricultural assessment / land revenue, the learned Single Judge did not permit that contention to be urged because it was never urged by the State Government before the revenue authorities. We pointed out to the learned counsel appearing for both the sides that so far as the points which are considered and decided by the leaned Single Judge, 4 we find nothing wrong in the order, however, if the parties agree, the question whether the document amounts to grant of the land in favour of the Company can be permitted to be considered by the authorities under the Land Revenue Code. Both the parties agree that the said question can be permitted to be inquired into by the authorities because that question was never raised before. In this view of the matter therefore, the appeal is disposed off in following terms. 2] The order dated 26th September 2003 is modified to the extent it declines to consider the aspect whether the document results in grant of the land in favour of the Company. The matter is remitted back to the petitioner No.2  Principal Secretary (Revenue), Government of Maharashtra to consider the question whether by the document dated 22nd June 1978 the land has been granted by the Union of India in favour of the Company and if the answer is yes, whether because of that, the Company is liable to pay land revenue / NA assessment. 5 Interim order, which is presently operating in the appeal, shall continue to operate during the pendency of the enquiry before the petitioner No.2 for a period of four weeks after the decision of the petitioner No.2 if the decision is against the Company. The petitioner No.2 is however directed to dispose off the matter in accordance with law after granting an opportunity of being heard to all the sides as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of six months from today. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate / Private Secretary of this Court. Certified copy expedited. ( JUSTICE D.K. DESHMUKH ) ( JUSTICE R.S. MOHITE )