1 wp-5617-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5617 OF 2010 Murlidhar M. Katkar & Anr. ..Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. V. V. Pai i/b. Mr. V. M. Bhate for Petitioners. Mr. S. R. Nargolkar – G.P. for Respondents. CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED : JULY 27, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. One of the grievance raised by the petitioners against the respondents is that the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents under the Land Acquisition Act for resettlement of project affected persons is bad in law. It is submitted that the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 is a Code by itself and it is mandatory on the 2 wp-5617-10 part of the respondents to initiate proceedings under the said Act. In order to substantiate the contention, reliance is placed on the Full Bench decision reported in 1984(2) Bom. C.R. 166 Ganpat Balwant Pawar & Ors. vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 7, Krishna Dhom Project, Wal, Dist : Satara & Ors. 3. Considered the contention canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the conclusion recorded by the Full Bench in paragraph 27. The relevant observation in paragraph 27 so far as the issue in question is concerned, reads thus: “It is not correct to say that after 11th of March, 1977 resettlement of persons displaced as a result of any project cannot be done except in accordance with the provisions of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976. The procedure prescribed under the Resettlement Act becomes applicable only when a declaration is made under section 11(1) of that Act that the provisions of the said Act shall be applicable to a project, such a declaration will follow only after the formation of the opinion by the State Government that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest to make such a declaration. When such a notification is not issued or has not been 3 wp-5617-10 issued, the Government is free to take recourse to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to resettle the persons who are displaced or will be displaced as a result of any project.” 4. In view of the above referred conclusion recorded by the Full Bench, the contention raised by the petitioners is misconceived, cannot be sustainable in law. Hence, writ petition disposed of accordingly keeping other issues raised in the petition open. (D. D. SINHA, J.) (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)