1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition Nos. 1932/2010 Kisan Mahadu Kanhekar and othes Vs. State of Mah. and others. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. S. T. Harkare, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Deshpande, AGP for the respondents 1 to 3. CORAM: B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd SEPTMBER, 2010. 1] Advocate Harkare contends that by impugned communication dated 24/2/2009 certificate as project affected persons are denied to the petitioners. He states that lands of the petitioners are acquired for establishing National Fish Seed Farm”, and acquisition is for public project. According to him, as that status is denied to the petitioners, they are continuously made to suffer and cause of action is continuous. 2] Learned AGP states that he has received instructions and is seeking time to file appropriate affidavit. He is heard in the light of instructions received. 3] However, after hearing both counsel, prima facie, it is seen that the lands of petitioners are acquired under Land Acquisition Act i. e. for public purpose of establishing National Fish Seed Farm. The provisions of Section 2(1) (c ) of Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986 defining the project are prima facie attracted. 2 4] Mr. Harkare has pointed out that the impugned order is passed behind the back of the petitioners. He has requested the Court to direct the respondent to issue such certificate. However, learned AGP pointed out that there are certain other aspects which need to be looked into before issuing the same. 5] In this situation, I find that interest of justice can be met with by directing respondent no.2 or subordinate working under him (District Rehabilitation Officer) to hear the petitioners and to pass appropriate orders after considering legal provisions and the facts in the matter. Hence, the impugned communication dated 24.2.2009 is quashed and set aside and the petitioners are directed to appear before respondent no.2 – District Rehabilitation Officer, Yavatmal on 5th October, 2010. The Authority shall hear the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in the matter by 31st October, 2010. 6] Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. JUDGE Ambulkar.