1 wp10689-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.10689/2010 Shri Vilas S/o Dhanji Zalte and others .. Petitioners VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. .. Respondents ...... S/Shri V.G.Sakolkar and A.B.Kale,Advs.for Petrs. Shri D.V.Tele,AGP for R-State .... CORAM : A.A.SAYED,J. DATE : 20/12/2010. ORAL ORDER : 1] By the above petition, the petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of the notices dated 30/12/10 and 15/11/10 issued by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon. By the impugned notice dated 30/12/10, the petitioners were directed to redeposit an amount of Rs.1,21,52,481/- and thereafter, by the impugned notice dated 15/11/2010, petitioners were called upon to show cause as to why action for contempt of Court should not be initiated against them for having failed to redeposit the amount within the stipulated period. 2] The controversy in the petition is in respect of the calculations made by the S.L.A.O. It appears that after execution proceedings, the petitioners were permitted to 2 wp10689-10 withdraw the sum of Rs.1,21,52,481/- which was deposited by the State Government towards compensation in respect of the land of the petitioners, which was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The said amount was withdrawn under the order of the trial Court dated 27/7/10 in the execution proceedings. It appears that the said order was passed after the S.L.A.O. had verified the calculation of the compensation and found the calculation to be correct. The Government Counsel had also given his no objection to the said calculation. The trial Court therefore, observed that in view of the no objection from the Government Counsel, as also since the S.L.A.O. had found the calculation to be correct, it has no reason to refuse the calculation of the applicants and the learned Judge allowed withdrawal of the said amount to the petitioners. Whilst allowing the withdrawal of the said amount, the petitioners were directed to furnish a bond stating that if any order in respect of redeposit of the amount is passed, the petitioners would abide by the same and redeposit the said amount. The said Bond, has since been filed. 3] It appears that thereafter, some recalculations have been done in respect of the said amount and the petitioners were issued the impugned notice dated 30/10/10 to redeposit the said amount of Rs.1,21,52,481/-. Since the amount was not redeposited by the petitioners within the 8 days time granted by the Court, the learned Judge, by notice dated 15/11/10, issued show cause notice as to why action for contempt be not initiated against the petitioners. Hence the above Petition. 4] This Court vide its order dated 25/10/10 had directed the learned A.G.P. to seek instructions and also directed that no further action in contempt be taken against the petitioners until next date i.e. on 2/12/2010. On 2/12/10, a 3 wp10689-10 reply came to be filed by respondent no.2 which was taken on record and the ad-interim protection was continued till the next date i.e. 10/12/10. On 10/12/2010, petitioners filed rejoinder. Since rejoinder was tendered only in Court, time was granted and the matter was adjourned till today i.e. 20/12/2010 and the ad-interim protection was granted till today. 5] I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit of the respondent no.2 which was filed by learned A.G.P. On a pertinent query by the Court, the learned A.G.P. is not in a position to throw any light as to exactly what is the difference in the recalculated amount from the original amount. The affidavit filed by the respondent no.2 in that regard is also found wanting. 6] In the circumstances, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The petitioners shall appear before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon on 10th January 2011 at 11 a.m. On that day the petitioners shall file an affidavit stating the amounts they have so far received towards compensation of their land. The petitioners will be given copy of the recalculations which have been arrived at and would be granted an opportunity to have a say on the said recalculation. 7] In the event,the learned Judge comes to the conclusion after hearing the petitioners that there is a difference in the amount, the learned Judge will pass necessary orders only in respect of the difference of the amount, and not insist on redeposit of the entire amount of Rs. 1,21,52,481/-. Only if the difference is in excess, the entire amount shall be directed to be redeposited. This exercise shall be carried out and necessary orders would be 4 wp10689-10 passed by the learned Judge, on or before 25th January 2011. Till the said issue is decided, the learned Judge shall not proceed with any action for contempt and the show cause notice shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioners are directed to cooperate. 8] It is however, made clear that if any order is passed in respect of the redeposit, petitioners shall be bound to comply with the same, in view of the Bond which has been furnished by them, notwithstanding any proposed challenge by them to the said order for deposit. If the said order is subjected to challenge before any forum, the same would not be entertained, unless the amount as directed is first deposited by the petitioners. 9] With aforesaid directions, the Petition is disposed of. 10] The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon after passing of the order by him shall submit a comprehensive report to this Court. (A.A.SAYED,J.) umg/wp10689-10