fa130.08 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2008 The Executive Engineer Beed Minor Irrigation, Beed head Quarter at Ambajogai .. APPELLANT VERSUS 1 Rangnath @ Raghunath s/o Sambhaji Dahiphale age 35 years, occ. agril r/o Halamb, Tq. Ambejogai, Dist. Beed. 2 The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Beed. .. RESPONDENTS WITH FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 18968 OF 2007 The Executive Engineer Beed Minor Irrigation, Beed Head Quarter at Ambajogai .. APPELLANT VERSUS 1 Kishan s/o Ganpati Dahiphale age 45 years, occ. agril r/o Halamb, Tq. Ambajogai Dist. Beed. 2 The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Beed. .. RESPONDENTS fa130.08 2 Mrs. Geeta Deshpande, advocate for appellant. Mr. S.V. Ghute, advocate for respondent no.1 . Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for the State. CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : AUGUST 4, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 Heard. 2 First Appeal no. 130/2008 is already admitted. First Appeal St. No. 18968/2007 stands admitted. With the consent of the parties, both the appeals are taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 3 These appeals are presented by the acquiring body raising exception to the judgment and award passed in LAR Nos. 234/1986 & 289/1986 by the II Additional Distirct Judge, Ambajogai on 27-1-2000. 4 The only objection raised in these appeals is in respect of non- impleadment of acquiring body in reference applications decided by the reference court. It is the contention of the acquiring body that the lands have been acquired for construction of ‘Minor Irrigation Tank of villaage fa130.08 3 Khodwa Savargaon, Tq. Ambajogai, Dist. Beed and acquisition is for Godawari Khore Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation. It is the contention of the appellant that acquiring body is necessary party while determining quantum of compensation receivable by the claimants. Reliance is placed on the judgment in the matter of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Gyan Devi reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court 724 and Abdul Rasak and others vs. Kerala Water Authority and others reported in AIR 2002 Supreme Court 817. In view of the judgments of the Apex Court ( cited supra ), the acquiring body is proper party in proceedings before the reference court and is entitled to be impleaded as party in both the proceedings and as such, the decision rendered by the reference court is vitiated. There is no other alternate except to quash and set aside the impuged judgment and award passed by the reference court. 5 The appeals are thus allowed. Judgment and award passed by the reference court on 27-1-2000 in LAR Nos. 284/1986 and 289/1986 are quashed and set aside and the matters are remitted back to the reference court with direction to permit impleadment of Godawari Khore Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation / acquiring body, as party respondent to fa130.08 4 the proceedings. The acquiring body shall be deemed to have been brought on record as respondents in the reference applications. The clause title of the reference applications shall be amended accordingly. The acquring body may file written statement to the claim petitions filed by the claimants, within eight weeks from today. Civil Court shall expeditiously proceed to decide the reference applications and decide the same as expeditiously as possible preferably by the end of this year. Both the parties shall be allowed an opportunity to lead evidence. The acquiring body shall be allowed an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses who are already examined by the claimants and those witnesses shall be made available by the claimants for the purpose of cross examination by the acquiring body, if request is extended in that behalf before the reference court. The evidence of the witnesses already adduced may be considered while deciding the reference applications and the witnesses who are not available and who cannot be brought on record for the purpose of cross examination, shall be considered by the reference court while deciding the cross objections, even though the acquiring body did not have an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses. It is needless to record that the acquiring body shall have liberty to adduce evidence for the purpose of putting forth their case and oppose the request of the claimants in respect of grant of enhanced fa130.08 5 compensation. The acquiring body / appellant herein shall not be entitled to have separate notice of the proceedings and the parties to the proceeding shall cause appearance before the reference court on 29-8-2011. The amount of compensation deposited in this court shall be transmitted to the reference court and disbursement of said amount shall be subject to decision of the reference applications. The claimants shall be entitled to retain the amount of compensation which they have already withdrawn in pursuance of the decision rendered by reference court and, withdrawal of such amount of compensation shall be subject to determination of reference applications tendered by them. In view of the directions issued above, first appeals presented by the appellants shall stand allowed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. 6 Pending civil application, if any, does not survive and stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE,J.) dyb