wp9057.10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9057 OF 2010 1 Radhakishan Dhondiram Telang (Ibitwar) age 40 years, occ. agril r/o Chakur, Tq. Chakur Dist. Latur. 2 Shivraj Dhondiram Telang (Ibitwar) age 45 years, occ. agril r/o Chakur, Tq. Chakur Dist. Latur. 3 Sheshrao Sopanrao Jagdale age 50 years, occ. agril r/o Latur Road, Tq. Chakur Dist. Latur. 4 Ganpat Dattatraya Sali age 50 years, occ. agril r/o Latur Road, Tq. Chakur Dist. Latur. 5 Rajaram Dattatraya Telang age 55 years, occ. agril r/o Latur Road, Tq. chakur Dist. Latur. 6 Achyut Narayan Mundhe age 50 years, occ. agril r/o Latur Road, Tq. chakur Dist. Latur. 7 Vijaykumar Narsing Mundhe age 45 years, occ. agril r/o Mohanlal, TQ. Chakur wp9057.10 2 Dist. Latur. 8 Bharat Sopan Jagdale age 51 years, occ. agril r/o Latur Road, Tq. Chakur Dist. Latur. .. PETITIONERS VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Revenue and Forest Department Mantralaya, Mumbai 2 District Collector Latur. Dist. Latur. 3 District Rehabilitation Officer Collector Office, Latur Dist. Latur. 4 The Special Land Acquisition Officer (Sawarna Project ) Latur, Dist. Latur. .. RESPONDENTS Mr. Anand Patil, advocate holding for Mr. V.D. Gunale, advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for the State. ===== CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 8 th DECEMBER, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER B.R. GAVAI, J.) 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. wp9057.10 3 2 By way of present petition the petitioners have approached this court being aggrieved by the order dt. 7-4-2010 passed by respondent no. 3 thereby refusing to grant project affected persons certificate to the petitioners. 3 Affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of the respondent stating therein that since the lands of the petitioners are acquired for construction of railway track and as such, petitioners are not entitled for the benefits of project affected persons. 4 We find that the view taken by the respondent is totally untenable in law. 5 “Project” has been defined in clause 10 of section 2 of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999. Perusal of the said definition would reveal that the definition is wide enough to include any work of construction, extension, improvement or development of public utility. Laying down railway track by any means would be included as a work of development of public utility. wp9057.10 4 6 In that view of the matter, we find that respondent no. 3 has grossly erred in denying certificate to the petitioners. Rule is therefore made absolute in terms of prayer clause ‘D’ & ‘E’. ( R. M. BORDE ) ( B. R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb