-: 1 :- wp-910/10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 910 OF 2010. Yeshwant Laxman Gokhale and Anr. ..Petitioners. Versus The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Special Unit No. 1 & Others. ..Respondents. AND WRIT PETITION NO. 911 OF 2010. Yeshwant Laxman Gokhale and Anr. ..Petitioners. Versus The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Special Unit No. 1 & Others. ..Respondents. Mr. S. V. Pitre for the petitioners. Mr. R. M. Patne, AGP for the respondent nos. 1 & 2. Coram : R. V. MORE, J. Date : July 27, 2010. P. C. : 1. Rule. 2. By consent, rule is made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing. Since the facts of both the above petitions are similar, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Following are undisputed facts : Petitioners’ land came to be acquired by the respondents by passing award under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. srp -: 2 :- wp-910/10 Petitioners’ being aggrieved preferred reference under section 18 of the said Act. Reference was partly allowed and amount of compensation was enhanced. The petitioner made an application in view of the disposal of the Reference, for withdrawal of the amount deposited by the respondent in the Reference Court. Initially on 25.2.2008, the Reference Court passed an order thereby allowing the petitioner to withdraw the amount subject to furnishing bank guarantee. Petitioners by filing another application pointed out that the respondent have not preferred any appeal against the award of the reference Court and therefore they are entitled to withdraw the amount deposited by the respondent alongwith interest accrued thereon. This application was disposed by the reference Court, thereby permitting the petitioners to withdraw the amount, however subject to compliance of the above order dated 25.2.2008. This order is challenged in the present petition. 4. The grievance of the petitioners is that in the absence of any appeal filed by respondent challenging award of the reference Court, the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the amount deposited by the respondent in Reference Court without furnishing bank guarantee. Learned AGP after taking instructions submitted that the respondent has not filed any appeal challenging the award passed in Reference. 5. In view of above undisputed position, I am satisfied that the -: 3 :- wp-910/10 impugned order requiring petitioners to furnish bank guarantee as condition precedent for withdrawal of the compensation amount is not correct. The petitioners being owners of the land acquired by the respondent are entitled to withdraw the said amount of compensation without furnishing bank guarantee. In the circumstances, above petitions are disposed of by passing following order. -: O R D E R :- (i) The petitioners are permitted to withdraw the principal amount deposited by the respondents in Reference Court alongwith interest accrued thereon without furnishing bank guarantee. (ii) The impugned order is modified to that effect. (R.V. MORE, J.)