High Court
Facts
- 1 -IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD16 WRIT PETITION NO. 424 OF 2025VAIJNATH NAGURAO NEHARKAR AND ANOTHERVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTORAND OTHERSWITH18 WRIT PETITION NO. 426 OF 2025ASHRUBA GANPATI NAGARGOJE DIED THR LRS MOHAN ASHRUBANAGARGOJEVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTORAND OTHERSWITH119 WRIT PETITION NO. 1274 OF 2025DATTU LIMBA KALBHERE DIED THR LRS MARUTI DATTU KALBHEREAND OTHERSVERSUSTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY ANDOTHERSMr.R.A.Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioners in WP Nos. 424/2025and 426/2025 and Mr.C.K.Shinde, Advocate for the petitioners in WPNo.1274/2025.Mr.A.B.Girase, Government Pleader alongwith Mr.V.M.Kagne andMr.R.K.Ingole, for the respondent/State. ( CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ. ) DATE : FEBRUARY 3, 2025khs/Feb.2025/424 - 2 -PER COURT : 1.We have heard the learned Advocates for the petitioners inall these petitions and as also the learned Government Pleader.2. These set of petitions are different in the sense that onepetition seeks implementation and execution of the award passed in theLokadalat and in the others the award of Reference Court is waitingexecution for recovery of the monies due under award for compulsoryacquisition of lands.3.It is being demonstrated that time and again this Court hasbeen issuing directions so that the monies are paid to the land ownerseither pursuant to the decree of a Civil Court or the decree passed by aLokadalat. This Court had even taken a suo-moto cognizance and hadissued certain directions pursuant to which some mechanism wasevolved by GR dated 03.04.2018, providing for constitution ofCommittees and implementation of directions leading to sequentialdistribution of compensation depending upon finality of the ordereither in the form of passing of the award or allowing of a reference bythe Reference Court or passing of a decree / award in a lokadalat.khs/Feb.2025/424 - 3 -Nothing thereafter has reported to have happened pursuant to this GR.4.Again a similar GR was issued on 23.11.2021 by changingthe composition of the Committee. Still the things were not taken anyfurther. It is thus evident that inspite of this Court having takencognizance and pragmatically expected the State to evolve a policy forcompensating the land owners sequentially, nothing concrete has comeout.5.Surprisingly, in PIL No.28/2022, at the Principal Seat in thematter of Bharat Tukaram Navale Vs. The State of Maharashtra andothers, the issue was raised once again and the division bench passedthe order on 19.06.2024 issuing some guidelines in paragraph No.10,which read as under :-“10. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, we dispose of this PILpetition with the following directions :-[a]For expeditious disposal of the execution proceedings and otherproceedings pending in the Courts and also for ensuring timelypayment of compensation and other related benefits to the landoustees, the State Government shall frame appropriate guidelineswithin a period of found months from today. khs/Feb.2025/424 - 4 -[b]Such guidelines shall be circulated to all concerned, and it shallbe the duty of the department concerned to ensure that the guidelinesare implemented and followed in their letter and spirit ; [c] For the purpose of framing guidelines, we permit the petitionerto make his suggestions to the concerned department within afortnight;[d]In the proceedings pending under Sections 18 and 28-A of theLand Acquisition Acct, 1894, it will be open to the parties concerned tomake appropriate application before the Court concerned seekingexpeditious disposal of the proceedings, and in case such application ismade, same shall be considered by the Court concerned with utmostseriousness and expedition. [e] We further direct that in such proceedings where the State, itsauthorities and instrumentalities are parties, they shall fully co-operatefor expeditious disposal of the proceedings before the Court concerned;[f]This order shall be placed before the Registrar General of thisCourt to taking steps to issue an appropriate circular to the Court in theState of Maharashtra for ensuring expeditious disposal of theproceedings, under Section 18 and 28A of the Land Acquisition Act,1894, including execution proceedings.”6.Conspicuously, the orders / directions issued by this Courtat this bench in PIL No.34/2017 were not brought to the notice of thedivision bench which passed the aforementioned order at the PrincipalSeat. Even the circulars issued or the GR’s dated 03.04.2018 andkhs/Feb.2025/424 - 5 -23.11.2021 were not brought to the notice of that division bench. Thewhole thrust has been on expeditious payment of compensation to theland owners in respect of the lands acquired under the relevant lawscompulsorily.7.The experience has demonstrated that even after enteringinto a settlement at a Lokadalat, the State machinery and the Stateinstrumentalities have been unable to pay the compensation agreedmuch less in a stipulated time. Though it is being pointed out that theGovernment Resolution was passed on 16.02.2022, laying down someguidelines for making payment of compensation in respect of Lokadalatawards within 6 months, in effect that does not happen. In the matterof Vasudeo Sonu Patil and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra, andothers, WP No.11760/2021 and connected matters, a division bench ofthis Court had elaborately dealt with the plight of such land owners.The observations, which according to us are relevant, read as under :-“9. We would be failing in our duties if we do not consider the plight ofall farmers who are not before the Court, alongside these petitioners, asthey are identically situated and have not been able to reach this Courtfor reasons best known to all, which is primarily due to lack of finances.It cannot be ignored that, for the farmers in the Marathwada Region,khs/Feb.2025/424
Legal Reasoning
- 6 -life has always been a long, tenacious and a painfull struggle. In alargely infertile land, shortage of water as this area is in the rainshadow region, lack of adequate water bodies, save and except reliancebeing on the Jayakwadi dam which was constructed as long ago as in1972, the fact is that the farmers count and face each day of their livesas it comes. This is surely a pitiable condition. Nevertheless, it wouldbe showing disrespect to these farmers in particular and humanity ingeneral, if the authorities or even this court indicates any show of pitytowards them. It is their legal right to get compensation and for aperson who is vested with a legal right, the demand for justice goeshand in hand. Those who have legal right, ought not to be made tobeg for justice, rather it is their right to demand justice. Taking intoaccount our experience in these cases, we, therefore, direct the StateGovernment that henceforth, without any expectation, they wouldensure that the compensation amounts to the farmers who haveentered into Lokadalat settlements, shall be paid within 180 days, asper the G.R. dated 26 .07.2021. Failing to make such payments wouldlegally entail interest component, which would be calculated and theofficers who would be responsible for the delay, shall have to be pay thesaid interest component from their salary.”8.Inspite of such happenings, the issue is still at square oneelse these petitioners would not have been required to approach thisCourt. khs/Feb.2025/424
Decision
- 7 -9.So far as the awards passed by the Reference Courtregarding which they have preferred execution proceedings, we directthe Executing Court concerned to take drastic and emergent steps forattaching the properties of the acquiring bodies or the Government, sellit, realize the money and disburse to the concerned petitioners withinthree months. This should be done with expected zeal and in anefficient and urgent manner. Else, it would be a failure of the Courts inbringing the fruits of the awards / decrees to the rightful claimants. 10.As far as the awards passed in the Lokadalat, respondentNos. 2 and 3 to take urgent steps and pay the compensation to thepetitioners as expeditiously as possible and in any case within 3 (three)months.11.If the monies are not paid within the stipulated time asdirected, it would carry interest @ 12% p.a., 50% of which shall berecoverable from the persons who are responsible for the delayedpayment and the task of fixing the responsibility shall rest withrespondent No.2 / Collector. khs/Feb.2025/424 - 8 -12.During the course of dictation, the learned GovernmentPleader places before us another Government Circular dated29.11.2024 that was issued apparently in the light of the directions ofthe bench at Nagpur, wherein a similar issue regarding delay inpayment of compensation in the matter of awards passed by theReference Court and consequential directions for payment of interestfor the delayed payment was apparently considered and decided. Itdirects the responsibilities to be fixed on the individuals either for notundertaking the acquisition process as contemplated in the concernedlegislation, not disbursing the amounts of compensation, responsibilityfixed for payment of interest on the delayed payment of compensationetc.13.As can be gathered, this seems to be another attempt by the Stateaimed at the same direction. It is not a matter of policy, rather it is amatter of implementation of the policies which already occupy the field,that too over and above the responsibility of a State in the matter ofacquisition of individual properties, which is a constitutional and ahuman right as held in Tukaram Kana Joshi and Ors. thr. Power ofAttorney Holder Vs. M.I.D.C. and Ors., Civil Appeal No. 7780 of 2012khs/Feb.2025/424 - 9 -(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2418 of 2012).14.The petitions stand disposed of. ( PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) ( MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)khs/Feb.2025/424