:1: bgp bgp bgp IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1400 OF 2005 NO.1400 OF 2005 NO.1400 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1380 OF 2005 NO.1380 OF 2005 NO.1380 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1381 OF 2005 NO.1381 OF 2005 NO.1381 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1382 OF 2005 NO.1382 OF 2005 NO.1382 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1383 OF 2005 NO.1383 OF 2005 NO.1383 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1384 OF 2005 NO.1384 OF 2005 NO.1384 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1385 OF 2005 NO.1385 OF 2005 NO.1385 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1386 OF 2005 NO.1386 OF 2005 NO.1386 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1387 OF 2005 NO.1387 OF 2005 NO.1387 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1388 OF 2005 NO.1388 OF 2005 NO.1388 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1389 OF 2005 NO.1389 OF 2005 NO.1389 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1390 OF 2005 NO.1390 OF 2005 NO.1390 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1391 OF 2005 NO.1391 OF 2005 NO.1391 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1392 OF 2005 NO.1392 OF 2005 NO.1392 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1393 OF 2005 NO.1393 OF 2005 NO.1393 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1394 OF 2005 NO.1394 OF 2005 NO.1394 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1395 OF 2005 NO.1395 OF 2005 NO.1395 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1396 OF 2005 NO.1396 OF 2005 NO.1396 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1397 OF 2005 NO.1397 OF 2005 NO.1397 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1398 OF 2005 NO.1398 OF 2005 NO.1398 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1399 OF 2005 NO.1399 OF 2005 NO.1399 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1401 OF 2005 NO.1401 OF 2005 NO.1401 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1402 OF 2005 NO.1402 OF 2005 NO.1402 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1403 OF 2005 NO.1403 OF 2005 NO.1403 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1404 OF 2005 NO.1404 OF 2005 NO.1404 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1406 OF 2005 NO.1406 OF 2005 NO.1406 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1407 OF 2005 NO.1407 OF 2005 NO.1407 OF 2005 :2: WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1408 OF 2005 NO.1408 OF 2005 NO.1408 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1409 OF 2005 NO.1409 OF 2005 NO.1409 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1410 OF 2005 NO.1410 OF 2005 NO.1410 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1411 OF 2005 NO.1411 OF 2005 NO.1411 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1412 OF 2005 NO.1412 OF 2005 NO.1412 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1413 OF 2005 NO.1413 OF 2005 NO.1413 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1414 OF 2005 NO.1414 OF 2005 NO.1414 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1415 OF 2005 NO.1415 OF 2005 NO.1415 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1416 OF 2005 NO.1416 OF 2005 NO.1416 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1417 OF 2005 NO.1417 OF 2005 NO.1417 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1418 OF 2005 NO.1418 OF 2005 NO.1418 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1419 OF 2005 NO.1419 OF 2005 NO.1419 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1431 OF 2005 NO.1431 OF 2005 NO.1431 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1432 OF 2005 NO.1432 OF 2005 NO.1432 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1433 OF 2005 NO.1433 OF 2005 NO.1433 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1434 OF 2005 NO.1434 OF 2005 NO.1434 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1435 OF 2005 NO.1435 OF 2005 NO.1435 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1436 OF 2005 NO.1436 OF 2005 NO.1436 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1437 OF 2005 NO.1437 OF 2005 NO.1437 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1438 OF 2005 NO.1438 OF 2005 NO.1438 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1439 OF 2005 NO.1439 OF 2005 NO.1439 OF 2005 WITH WITH WITH WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.1440 OF 2005 NO.1440 OF 2005 NO.1440 OF 2005 Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Vikas Mahamandal ..Petitioner Vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr.D.R.Shelke with Santosh Narwade Patil i/b. T.B.Bhosale for petitioner. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP for respondent No.1. Mr.M.S.Karnik, Mr.P.J.Ahuja and Mr.Sachin Gite for respondent No.2. :3: CORAM CORAM CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & :- V.C.DAGA & :- V.C.DAGA & MRS.MRIDULA MRS.MRIDULA MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. BHATKAR,JJ. BHATKAR,JJ. DATED DATED DATED :- 4TH APRIL,2009 :- 4TH APRIL,2009 :- 4TH APRIL,2009 JUDGMENT JUDGMENT JUDGMENT (PER : V.C.DAGA,J.) (PER : V.C.DAGA,J.) (PER : V.C.DAGA,J.) 1. Heard learned Counsel for parties in all these petitions. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith in all the petitions. 3. All these petitions involve common question of law based on common facts as such they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. In order to appreciate the legal controversy, facts are taken from Writ Petition No.1400 of 2005. 4. The respondents-land holders in all these petitions are different but the petitioner in all these petitions is common i.e. Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, a statutory body established under the provisions of Maharashtra Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation Act No.23 of 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the "Corporation) who has filed these batch of petitions under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the awards and/or orders passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLO) in various :4: land acquisition proceedings initiated pursuant to the applications under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act for short) to claim enhanced compensation in respect of lands situate at village Bharvir (Bk.)Tq.Igatpuri Dist.Nashik and adjoining area; whereby and whereunder the directions are issued to the State Government to make payment of the enhanced compensation along with other benefits. The Corporation, in the alternative, has also prayed that if the applications of the claimants respondents are found to be within limitation, then the matters may be remanded back to the Collector or SLAO as the case may be for disposal on merits in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner Corporation. 5. The facts giving rise to the present Writ Petition fall in a very narrow compass. The Appropriate Government issued a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") which was published on 21st February, 1985. In furtherance to this Notification, a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 3rd April, 1986. The lands were acquired from the land owners. The SLAO made his Award under Section 11 of the Act on 28th April, 1988. The Award of the Collector was challenged by some of the Claimants by filing petition under Section 18 of the Act. These references were referred by the SLAO :5: to the Court of competent jurisdiction ("the said Court" for short). The said Court enhanced the compensation payable to the Claimants. 6. Some of the Claimants, like petitioners did not seek Reference under Section 18 of the Act, filed applications before the SLAO under Section 28A of the Act, to claim enhanced compensation, in consonance with the order of reference Court. 7. On an applications moved by the petitioners like petitioner in Writ Petition No.1400 of 2005, the SLAO vide his order dated 6th August, 2002, direct to pay enhanced compensation to such applicants. 8. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid Award and/or order passed by the SLAO, the petitioner-Corporation has preferred this Petition contending, that the impugned order of the SLAO is bad, illegal and in breach of principles of natural justice as much as it is ab-initio void. 9. The petitioner-Corporation has urged that the said impugned order has been passed after a lapse of period of limitation and that there are serious errors in the impugned order prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner- Corporation, who will have to pay the millions of rupees to the respondents by way of enhanced compensation. According to petitioner, even :6: if the Award and/or order is against the State Government, still the amount will have to be paid by the Corporation as such, Corporation is not only interested person but even aggrieved person entitled to maintain this petition. According to the petitioner, the Corporation was thus entitled to a reasonable notice under Section 28-A of the Act. In absence of such notice, the impugned order is in breach of principles of natural justice as well as contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court and followed by this Court in the case of petitioner itself. (See G.M.P.V.M. Vs. State of Maharashtra G.M.P.V.M. Vs. State of Maharashtra G.M.P.V.M. Vs. State of Maharashtra 2009 2009 2009 (1) Mh.L.J.883) (1) Mh.L.J.883) (1) Mh.L.J.883). 10. The petitioner submits that in the aforesaid judgment, after taking review of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the Division Bench of this Court presided over by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, ruled that in the acquisition proceedings, the petitioner- Corporation is a necessary party for whose benefit the land has been acquired, as such, the Corporation would be entitled to the notice and impleadment in the proceedings. It is also ruled in the said judgment that merely because the Corporation is a successor or is created legally or technically on a date subsequent to the pronouncement of the award that by itself cannot be a ground for holding that the said Corporation would not be entitled to the right to participate in the acquisition proceedings or :7: proceedings meant for determining enhanced compensation. 11. The learned Counsel for petitioner, thus, submits that the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted back for consideration afresh with direction to give opportunity of hearing to petitioner. 12. The learned Counsel for the respondent, though initially opposed this petition but having seen and on realising the law laid down by this Court as referred to hereinabove, agreed that the impugned order be set aside by consent of parties without examining the merits and/or demerits thereof and the matter be remitted back to the Collector for consideration afresh on the touchstone of the law laid down by this Court as well the Apex Court. 13. In the above view of the matter, all these petitions are allowed. The order dated 6th August, 2002 passed by the SLAO in L.A.Case No.23/83 impugned in Writ Petition No.1400 of 2005 and similar such orders passed in all other petitions are quashed and set aside. All these matters are remitted back to the SLAO for taking up proceedings afresh in terms of Section 28A of the Act in accordance with law for decision on merits by reasoned order following principles of natural justice after impleading the :8: petitioner as party respondent. The SLAO shall dispose of all the applications as expeditiously as possible preferrably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. In the event SLAO finds that the Award and/or order on the basis of which the enhanced compensation is being claimed under Section 28A is a subject matter of appeal before the Higher Court, the SLAO shall keep the proceedings in abeyance until the Award or order passed under Reference proceedings become final and conclusive. 14. In the result, rule is made absolute in terms of this order in all the above petitions with no order as to costs. (MRIDULA (MRIDULA (MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) BHATKAR,J.) BHATKAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)