1 wp4385 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4385 OF 2008 Dhiresh Kantilal Bafna & Ors. .. ... Petitioners. Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. ... Respondents. Mr. Jaydeep S. Deo for the Petitioners. Mr.V. S. Gokhale, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. R. M. Pethe for Respondent No.3. CORAM : B. H. MARLAPALLE & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 24TH AUGUST, 2010 P. C.: Heard Mr. Deo, learned Counsel for the petitioners. 2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have challenged the Award dated 31st March, 1979 in respect of the plot of land acquired from C.T.S. Nos. 1650 to 1654 and 1656 to 1661 of Shukrawar Peth, Pune. The challenge is on the ground of non-application of mind and malafide. It is also contended that the acquisition is colourable and outside the powers to acquire the land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Learned 2 wp4385 Counsel for the petitioners relied upon the decisions of this Court in the case of Rudmal Shionarayan Haridwar v/s State of Maharashtra & Ors., 1980 (0) BCI 100 and Yusuf Ajij Shaikh and Ors. v/s The Special Land Acquisition Officer and Ors., 1994 (4) Bom. C.R. 175. 3. Notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued some time in September/October, 1975 and at the first instance the petitioners filed Civil Suit No. 83 of 1976. After the Award dated 31st March, 1979 was passed they challenged the acquisition proceedings including Award in Regular Civil Suit No. 427 of 1978. It was contended that the inquiry as required under Section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act was not held and declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act was void ab initio and hence unenforceable. The suit was dismissed on 22nd January, 1982. The petitioners, therefore, filed Civil Appeal No.157 of 1982 and the same also came to be dismissed on 22nd January, 1986 by the learned District Judge at Pune. Second Appeal No. 546 and 547 of 1986 came to be filed before this Court and they were also dismissed by a common judgment dated 20th January, 2005. 4. It is now contended before us that initially for the widening of 3 wp4385 the road upto 35 ft. the land on which Subhansha bungalow is located was acquired some time in 1967 and the award was passed on 30th September, 1975. It is further alleged that despite this award passed the authorities concerned did not take any steps to take possession of the said land and instead they initiated acquisition proceedings in respect of the suit land belonging to the petitioners for widening of the road to 35 ft. The award has been passed on 31st March, 1979 in respect of the petitioners' land and the challenge to the acquisition proceedings by filing a civil suit has reached its finality in terms of the dismissal of the Second Appeal by this Court as the grounds of challenge raised in this petition are almost identical in the civil suit as well. In any case the allegation that instead of taking over possession of the land on which the said bungalow is located, the Government and the Corporation sought to acquire the petitioners' property, cannot be the reason to set aside the award which is passed on 31st March, 1979 and under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act which came in force in 1983/84, there are provisions which would declare the award illegal and that scheme is set out in Section 11A of the said Act. We are, therefore, satisfied that the legality of the acquisition 4 wp4385 proceedings cannot be challenged in filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and therefore the petition must fail. 5. The petition is summarily rejected. Sd/- Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)