1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 2525/1996 (Gangubai Fakira Sapre VERSUS The State of Mah. Thr. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Bombay & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Mr. A.P. Tathod, counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. B.H. Dangre, Addl. Government Pleader for the respondents. CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : APRIL 1, 2008. Heard Mr. A.P. Tathod, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. B.H. Dangre, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the instant petition, Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, in respect of lands in question was issued on 28.06.1983 and the award was passed on 24.10.1985. Some other claimants, whose lands were also acquired under the same notification which was issued under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, filed a reference before the Civil Court which was decided on 07.12.1992. The compensation was enhanced, and therefore, the petitioner also filed application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act within limitation for 2 getting enhanced compensation which is granted to similarly circumstanced claimants. It is submitted that the said application was rejected by the Land Acquisition Officer vide order dated 12.05.1995, which is impugned here. The counsel for the petitioner further contended that the procedure required to be undertaken under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act has not been undertaken in the present case, and therefore, in a similar situation, this Court vide order dated 03.09.2003, disposed of the Writ Petition No.368/1997, which was filed by one of the claimants whose application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act came to be rejected on the similar grounds. It is, therefore, contended that the issue involved in the present writ petition is identical to the one involved in the said writ petition, and therefore, for the reasons stated in the said order, the present writ petition may be disposed of with the same directions. Mrs. B.H. Dangre, the learned Additional Government Pleader, does not dispute the factual and legal aspect of the matter. In the backdrop of the above referred facts, the impugned order dated 12.05.1995 is hereby quashed and set aside. The petitioner's 3 application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act is restored to the file of the respondent no.4 and he is directed to proceed with the said application in accordance with the law and uninfluenced by any observation made by us in the present writ petition. No order as to costs. Civil Application No.2354/2008 is also accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE APTE