1 wp7986.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 7986 OF 2011 Raghunath Devchand Patil PETITIONER -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS ...... Shri S.P. Tiwari, advocate for the petitioner Shri N.B. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent/State. ...... CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 28th November , 2011. PER COURT : 1. The proceedings under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act were filed. The respondents made an application for impleadment as party in the said Reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. The said application came to be allowed. Aggrieved thereby, the present Petition is filed. 2. Shri Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in a reference under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, no party can be added. Learned counsel relies on the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of "Raghunath Dhondu Navde V/s 2 wp7986.11 Pandit Ramchandra Navde and others" reported in "2000(2) Mh.L.J. 81". Learned counsel contends that learned trial Judge has not considered these aspects and has erroneously allowed the application of the respondents under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code. 3. The proceedings under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act deals with the apportionment of payment of compensation, wherein all the interested parties can appear. The judgment in a case of Reghunath Dhondu Navde referred supra deals with a case of Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the said premise, it is observed by the learned Single Judge of this Court that the addition of party is not permissible. The scope of enquiry under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is distinct than under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act specifically deals with the apportionment of payment of compensation. It presupposes the dispute amongst the claimants to receive the amount of compensation. In such circumstances, all the interested parties are required to be heard. 4. In that view of the matter, no error is committed by the trial Court in allowing the application of the respondents for addition of party in the said reference. 5. Taking in to account the fact that the Reference is pending since 3 wp7986.11 long and the parties have not received the amount of compensation, the trial Court shall decide the said Reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one year from today. 6. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE ga s/wp7986.11