SSK/908 1 WP/1391.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONs WRIT PETITION NO.1391 OF 2011 Shri Sakharam Sonba Katurde & Ors. ....Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Harindar Toor with Mr. Dhaval Patil i/b. M/s. S. K. Legal Associates for the petitioners. Ms. S. S. Bhende, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 4. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & RANJIT MORE, JJ. DATED : 16th JUNE, 2011. P.C.: Only prayer of the petitioners who are project affected persons is that they are legally entitled to the benefit of rehabilitation under the Rehabilitation Act, but they have not been rehabilitated and repeated requests made to the respondents have fallen on deaf ears. 2. It appears that a letter dated 4th February, 2010 was addressed to the Sub-Divisional Officer - Rehabilitation Officer, Gunjawani Project No.1, District : Pune, District Rehabilitation Officer, District-Pune and the Collector, District – Pune by the petitioners’ advocate. It is annexed at Exhibit “H” to the petition. It calls upon them to consider the petitioners’ SSK/908 2 WP/1391.11 request for rehabilitation and pass appropriate orders. In the circumstances, we direct respondent no.2 - the Collector (Rehabilitation) and Deputy Director (Land) at Pune to consider the said letter dated 4th February, 2010 as petitioners’ representation and decide it expeditiously, independently and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order by him. 3. We make it clear that we have expressed no opinion on the merits of the case and the Collector (Rehabilitation) and Deputy Director (Land) at Pune shall decide the petitioners’ representation independently and in accordance with law. Considering the fact that the petitioners’ have been requesting the respondents that their request be considered since 2000 and also considering the fact that the award is of the year 1999, we expect the 2nd respondent - the Collector (Rehabilitation) and Deputy Director (Land) at Pune to decide the petitioners’ representation within the time frame laid down by this Court and not to ask for further extension of time. 4. Needless to say that the petitioners would be at liberty to approach this Court, in case, the order passed by this Court is not complied with. SSK/908 3 WP/1391.11 5. The petitioners shall approach the Collector (Rehabilitation) and Deputy Director (Land) at Pune along with a copy of this order. 6. The petition is disposed of in the aforestated terms. (RANJIT MORE, J.) (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.)