1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 468 OF 2009 1 The State of Maharashtra Through the Collector, Nanded 2 The Special Land Acquisition Officer, PT/MIW-2/ Collectorate, Nanded 3 The Executive Engineer, Medium Project,Irrigation Division, Sinchan Bhavan, New workshop, Nanded ...Appellants Versus Komtanbai w/o Udhav Rathod, Age 55 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Pallaiguda, Tq. Kinwat, District Nanded ...Respondent WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 469 OF 2009 1 The State of Maharashtra Through the Collector, Nanded 2 The Special Land Acquisition Officer, PT/MIW-2/ Collectorate, Nanded 3 The Executive Engineer, Medium Project,Irrigation Division, Sinchan Bhavan, New workshop, Nanded ...Appellants Versus Udhav s/o Dhanasingh Rathod, Age 60 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Pallaiguda, Tq. Kinwat, District Nanded ...Respondent 2 FIRST APPEAL NO. 470 OF 2009 1 The State of Maharashtra Through the Collector, Nanded 2 The Special Land Acquisition Officer, PT/MIW-2/ Collectorate, Nanded 3 The Executive Engineer, Medium Project,Irrigation Division, Sinchan Bhavan, New workshop, Nanded ...Appellants Versus Patibai w/o Heerasingh Rathod, Age 70 years, Occ. Agri, R/o. Pallaiguda, Tq. Kinwat, District Nanded (Died per Her L.Rs.) i) Kiran s/o Heerasingh Rathod, Age 45 years, Occ. Service ii) Saawan s/o Heerasingh Rathod, Age 35 years, Occ. Agriculture, iii) Pramod s/o Heerasingh Rathod Age 30 years,Occ. Agriculture, All R/o. Bhorad, Tq. Mahur, District Nanded ...Respondents ..... Mr. N.N. Jadhav, A.G.P. for the appellants Mr. M.M. Patil, Beedkar, advocate for respondents-claimants. ..... CORAM: R.G. KETKAR, J. DATED: 1ST DECEMBER, 2009 3 JUGMENT 1 By order dated 10.11.2009, the parties were put to the notice that the court will endeavour to dispose of the appeals finally at the stage of admission. Heard Shri Jadhav, learned A.G.P. in support of these appeals and Shri M.M. Patil, Beedkar, learned counsel for respondents-claimants. Admit. By consent of the parties, appeals are heard finally. 2 These appeals are preferred by the State Government against the judgment and order dated 22.12.2005, passed by the learned IInd Adhoc Additional District Judge, Nanded. Since these appeals raise common question of law and fact and also arise from common judgment and order, they can be conveniently disposed of by this common judgment. 3 The lands of the respondents-claimants were acquired by the appellant for the purpose of Minor-cum-Medium Multi Purpose Project at Pallaiguda. A notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short "the Act"), was published in the Government Gazette on 14.9.1995 and in the village on 3.12.1995. The possession of the lands was taken on 1.3.1995 and award was made on 24.3.1998. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation @ Rs.18,000/- per acre (Rs.45,000/- per hectare). 4 4 Being dissatisfied by the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, References were made under Section 18 of the Act claiming compensation @ Rs.40,000/- per acre (Rs. 1,00,000/- per hectare). On behalf of the respondents-claimants, it was contended that the acquired lands are situate on highway area, which is 24 kilometers from Kinwat. There are facilities of post office, telegraphic and telephone and the area has also developed school. Before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, considered the transaction dated 9.5.1995 in respect of Gat No.18, which was sold @ Rs.55,000/- per hectare. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, however, discarded the said transaction on the ground that though the transaction took place prior to issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, the price was too high. This aspect of the matter was considered by the learned District Judge in para 8 of the judgment and he observed that no explanation was given by the Special Land Acquisition Officer for discarding the sale instance of Gat No.18, which took place on 9.5.1995. The said Gat No.18 was sold @ Rs.55,000/- per hectare. Considering the marginal increase of 10% in the price of land per year, the learned District Judge increased the compensation by Rs.5000/- per acre i.e. Rs.12,500/- per hectare. 5 With the assistance of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I was taken through the record of the case. After hearing 5 learned counsel for the parties, as also after going through the record of the case, I am satisfied that the learned District Judge has not awarded exorbitant compensation. Learned District Judge has rightly observed that no explanation was given by the Special Land Acquisition Officer while discarding the sale instance in respect of land Gat No.18. The learned District Judge also considered the marginal increase of 10% per year in the price of the lands and taking into account these facts, the learned District Judge, enhanced the compensation @ Rs.18,000 to Rs.23,000/- per acre. 6 I am in agreement with the reasons and conclusions drawn by the learned District Judge. The appeals being devoid of substance , deserve to be dismissed. Hence, the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. *****