1 W.P.No.8842/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.8842 OF 2011. Balasaheb S/o Raosaheb Bidve, Age 50 years, Occ.Agril., R/o Rani Wahegaon, Tq.Partur, Dist.Jalna. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, through The Secretary, Irrigation Department, Mantralaya,Mumbai-32. 2. The Collector,Jalna, Dist.Jalna. 3. The Special Land Acquisition Officer/Deputy Collector Land Acquisition, Jalna, Dist.Jalna. 4. Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist.Parbhani. ... Respondents. ... Mr.A.B.Kale, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.V.Wagh, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 16.12.2011. 2 W.P.No.8842/11 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. The Respondent No.4 though served, is absent. This Court on 21.11.2011 had issued notices to the Respondents for final disposal. 4. The award U/s 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act was passed. As per the said award, the petitioner was entitled for the amount. The petitioner filed an application for withdrawal/receipt of the said amount. The Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Officer passed an order that unless the Bank guarantee of Nationalised Bank is given, the amount can not be disbursed. Mr.Kale, learned counsel for the petitioner states that even the amount is deposited by the acquiring body with the Special Land Acquisition Officer. 3 W.P.No.8842/11 5. Mr.Wagh, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the Respondents submits that the Government has issued a Circular. In view of the said Circular, the authority was justified in passing the said order. 6. The affidavit-in-reply is filed by the Respondent No.3. In the affidavit-in-reply also it is nowhere stated that appeal has been filed and some interim order is passed in the said appeal. Mr.Kale, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 19.12.2011, the petitioner had received the information under Right to Information Act that till today, no appeal is filed. The said communication is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. 7. In view of the fact that there is no prohibitory order from any Court of competent jurisdiction, the Special Land Acquisition Officer could not have imposed such an onerous condition that too after an award is passed. The party in whose favour the award is passed, is entitled for the amount unless the said award is 4 W.P.No.8842/11 stayed by the Court. 8. In light of the above, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (C). However, there shall be no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp884211