-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5740 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 5740 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 5740 OF 2007 Namdeo Eknath Bankar & Anr. .. Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. --- Mr. Girish S.Godbole for the Petitioners. Mr.S.K.Chincholikar, AGP for the Respondent -State. --- CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 21ST JANUARY, 2008. DATED : 21ST JANUARY, 2008. DATED : 21ST JANUARY, 2008. P.C. : P.C. : P.C. :- . The petitioners have challenged the order passed by the Minister of Revenue and Forest of Maharashtra Government dated 7th of February, 2007, quashing and setting aside the order of the Appellate Authority dated 9th of August, 2002. The order under challenge directs the Assistant Director of Town Planning, Nasik having determined the valuation amount of unearned income that amount becomes payable. The other direction in the order under challenge is that unearned income shall be payable in terms of the Government Resolution dated 8th of July, 1999 and the petitioners would be obliged to pay interest thereon. Insofar as a portion of the land is concerned, the same has been reserved for road -: 2 :- widening. The said portion must be handed over to the Municipal Corporation free of costs and that no FSI would be claimed in respect of the portion of the land to be handed over and/ or be transferred either on the subject plot or elsewhere. Based upon this condition, the said portion of the land has been excluded from the obligation to pay unearned income. 2. It is undisputed before me that the subject land, bearing survey No. 836, admeasuring 52 R at Nasik, was allotted to the father of the petitioner by the Collector, Nasik on 30th April,1949. The names of the petitioners and other heirs were entered in the Revenue record. On 8th of September, 1983, a Government Resolution was issued permitting the sale, gift, mortgage or conversion for non-agricultural purpose of such lands provided the payment of 50% of the net unearned income is made in the government treasury. 3. The petitioners applied for conversion of the land to old tenure on 13th September, 1989. The said application was replied on 15th of January, 1991, calling upon the petitioners to make certain compliances. Thereafter, on 20th of March, 1995, an application was made by the petitioners, requesting for permission to sell the land in favour of a Developer -: 3 :- M/s.Niketan Lands and Estates Pvt. Ltd.,. An enquiry was held in which the statements of the petitioners were recorded. The valuation of the land was done and the net unearned income of the land was fixed Rs.400/- per sq.meter. Accordingly, the respondent No.2 informed the petitioners that the petitioners should deposit a sum of Rs. 59,52,000/- as premium for permission to sell the land and /or conversion into non-agricultural user. 4. The petitioners filed appeal under section 247 of the Maharashtra Lands Revenue Code, challenging the order of the Respondent No.2. That appeal was partly allowed by setting aside the order dated 19.1.2001 passed by the Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik and the quantum of amount was determined on the basis of appellate order. The petitioners were ready and willing at the relevant time to abide by the Appellate order. They are ready and willing to abide by the said order even today. However, the Government has not accepted the said deposit as the government intended to take the matter in revision. In other words, the government wanted to reopen the matter after the Appellate order. That took a considerable period of time and further litigation. Ultimately, the government was directed by this court to decide the issue involved in the proceedings. The proceedings have been decided by the -: 4 :- government by the impugned order. 5. Mr. Godbole, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the Minister proceeds on erroneous basis that the valuation has not been done in accordance with the prevalent policy and scheme. He submits that the Government Resolution dated 8th of September, 1983 was fully implemented and considering location and situation of the land the quantum came to be determined. 6. The learned AGP on the other hand supports the impugned order. 7. It is pointed out that considerable period has lapsed and that has resulted in the sums not been paid in the Government treasury. The government has refused to accept the deposit from the petitioners in the light of the Relevant Government Resolution in that regard and the petitioners were pursuing the matter of sale permission of the land since 1997. The petitioners have received consideration under their transaction. However, despite their willingness to remit the sum to the government, the government has not taken final decision. Now, the final decision is taken but by imposing certain conditions which are patently -: 5 :- unsustainable. 8. After the matter was heard for some time, both sides agree that as the petitioners are ready to pay a sum as computed under the appellate order with reasonable interest for the period spread over, the matter can be finally concluded. Both sides do not dispute that the condition No.4 could not have been imposed by the Revenue Minister. In such circumstances, it is directed that the petitioners shall pay the principal sum of Rs. 15,28,626 plus an additional quantum after the area under reservation is excluded with interest thereon from 1998 till 2002 at the rate of 12% and from 2002 till 2007 at the rate of 9%. All sums as computed with interest shall be remitted within a period of six weeks from the date a revised computation/ calculation is forwarded and received. If remittance is made within this period, the concerned authorities to accept the same as full and final settlement of the claim towards unearned income and Authorities to take necessary steps so that the Purchaser / Transferee of the land holds the same on the terms and conditions stipulated in the order of allotment. Needless to state that if the amount is not paid within this period then the impugned order would stand confirmed and the petition to stand dismissed without any further -: 6 :- reference to the court. Needless to state that the petitioners would pay simple interest. That would be payable on the principal sum to be computed by the Collector Nasik within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. However, upon the receipt of the computation in terms of this order, the petitioners shall remit the same within six weeks from the date the revised calculation is received. 9. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order, issued by the registry. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.) .....