1 W.P.No.3234/11 UNREPORTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.3234 OF 2011. Rajaram S/o Kisan Chavan, through his legal heir, Satyawan S/o Rajaram Chavan, Age 42 years, Occ.Agri., R/o Chandgaon, Tq.Shrigonda, Dist.Ahmednagar. ... Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. ... Respondent. ... Mr.D.R.Jayabhar, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.V.B.Ghatge, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 21.06.2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. 2 W.P.No.3234/11 2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up final hearing. 3. The reference filed by the petitioner U/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, came to be allowed. The Respondent State preferred an appeal. No stay is granted in the appeal. In the Darkhast proceedings, the Respondent-State deposited the amount. The petitioner filed an application for withdrawal of the amount. The Reference Court allowed the application for withdrawal of the amount but with the rider that the petitioner shall submit the Bank guarantee equal to the said amount. The said order is assailed by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition. 4. The Executing Court can not go behind the decree. It has to execute the decree in the manner in which it is pronounced. When there is no stay from the appellate Court, the Executing Court did not have jurisdiction to impose such an onerous condition of submitting Bank guarantee, 3 W.P.No.3234/11 the same would be beyond its authority and jurisdiction. In light of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed. The condition impugned vide order dated 22.9.2009, directing the petitioner to submit Bank guarantee is quashed and set aside. 5. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (D). (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp323411