(1) wp507-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 507 OF 2011 Sadu @ Sadahiv s/o Keru Raite PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.R. Shirsat, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for the respondent/State. .... WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 510 OF 2011 Bhimabai w/o Ganpatrao Misal PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.R. Shirsat, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the respondent/State. .... WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 525 OF 2011 Devidas Buvasaheb Bangar PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.R. Shirsat, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the respondent/State. .... (2) wp507-11 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 531 OF 2011 Dnyanoba Alias Dnyandeo Dagdu Agam PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.R. Shirsat, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the respondent/State. .... WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 543 OF 2011 Shahadeo Dagdu Dhakane PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS .... Mr. S.R. Shirsat, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the respondent/State. .... CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 19th APRIL, 2011 ORAL ORDER : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties. 2. In these petitions, the petitioners have (3) wp507-11 impugned the orders/letters issued by respondent No. 3 - District Rehabilitation Officer, District Beed, by which he has rejected the petitioners' applications seeking Project Affected Person Certificates (for short, "PAP Certificate"). 3. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the writ petitions so also the reply-affidavit and the Government Resolution dated 3rd May, 2010, annexed thereto. From perusal of the Government Resolution, and the impugned orders/letters, we find that the criterion for issuing PAP Certificate laid down in the Government Resolution has not been considered by the District Rehabilitation Officer in proper perspective. Learned counsel for the parties have fairly stated that we need not record reasons for setting aside the impugned orders/letters and they have agreed for the following order. (A) The impugned orders/letters, issued by respondent No. 2 - District Rehabilitation Officer, Beed, are set aside. The petitioners' applications (4) wp507-11 for seeking PAP Certificates are restored to file. The District Rehabilitation Officer shall consider the petitioners' applications afresh in the light of the Government Resolution dated 3rd May, 2010, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order, on merits in accordance with law. (B) It is open to the petitioners to place further material, if any, in support of their claim alongwith copy of this order before the District Rehabilitation Officer within a period of four weeks from today. (C) If, for any reason, the District Rehabilitation Officer is not inclined to grant the petitioners' applications, he shall give them an opportunity of being heard before passing final order. (D) While passing this order, we shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case. (5) wp507-11 (E) Rule is disposed of in terms of above order. 4. Copy of this order, duly authenticated by the Court Shirestedar be supplied to learned counsel for the parties, on their request. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] NPJ/wp507-11-group