1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11385 OF 2010 Ankush s/o. Gopinath Fasale Age 48 years, Occ. Agril. R/o. Daulia Wadgaon Taluka Ashti Dist. Beed. Petitioner Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Collector, Beed. 3] The District Rehabilitation Officer Beed, Dist. Beed. Respondents Mr. D.A. Bide, Advocate, holding for Mr. B.T. Wagh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. N.B. Patil, AGP for the respondents. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ.. DATE : 21st December, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : [ PER R.M. BORDE, J.] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally. 2] The petitioner is making a grievance in respect of the refusal by the respondent No.3 in issuing the certificate , certifying that the petitioner is a project affected person. It appears that the agricultural land to the extent of 2 Hectare 41 R has been acquired by the State Government for construction of a Village Tank. The petitioner , as such, presented an application to the respondent No.3 2 for issuing a certificate certifying that he is a project affected person. The respondent No.3, however, has turned down the request on the ground that there are no directions by the State Government to issue a certificate in the matter, wherein, the acquisition is for the purpose of construction of a village tank. The definition of “Project” as set out in Section 2(10) of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999, ( hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act”) undisputedly cover the acquisition for the purpose of construction of a village tank. The respondent No.3 has, therefore, committed an irregularity in refusing to issue the certificate as requested by the petitioner on account of failure by the State to issue appropriate directions in the matter. 3] Considering the provision of Section 2(10) of the said Act of 1999, it was incumbent upon the respondent No.3 to issue necessary certificate as the acquisition for the purpose of construction of a village tank is also covered by the definition of “Project” in the said Act of 1999. 4] The petition, therefore, deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The respondent No.3 is directed to issue the certificate as requested by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of six weeks from today. Rule made absolute accordingly, with no orders as to costs. [R.M. BORDE,J] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp