Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Bombay High Court

Lakshiman Bhiva Thorat vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 13 February, 2017

Author: T.V. Nalawade

Bench: T.V. Nalawade

                                                             W.P.No.8535/16
                                          1




                                                                        
                        IN THE HIGH COURT  AT BOMBAY
                    APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                
                        WRIT PETITION NO. 8535 OF 2016

              Lakshiman s/o. Bhiva Thorat,
              Age 72 years, Occu. Agriculture,




                                               
              R/o. Muggaon, Tq. Patoda, 
              Dist. Beed.                ....Petitioner.

                      Versus




                                       
     1.       The State of Maharashtra,
              Through Principal Secretary,
                             
              Department of Revenue and
              Forest, Mantralaya,
              Mumbai - 400 032.
                            
     2.       The District Collector,
              Beed, Collector Office,
              Beed.
      


     3.       The Dy. Collector,
   



              Land Acquisition, Minor
              Irrigation Division, Beed
              Dist. Beed.





     4.       The Executive Engineer,
              Beed Irrigation Division,
              Beed, Tq. & Dist. Beed.            ....Respondents.

     Mr.N.K. Tungar, Advocate for petitioner.





     Mr.A.B. Girase, G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
                               CORAM   :  T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                          SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
                               DATED   :  February 13, 2017.
     ORAL JUDGMENT : 

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/02/2017 00:59:34 ::: W.P.No.8535/16 2 consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

2) The petition is filed to give directions to respondents to deposit the amount as per the award prepared in Lok Adalat. The award was prepared on 27.6.2015. But, till this date nothing is paid by the respondents. Respondent No. 4 is Acquiring Body.

3) The learned counsel for petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the Government Resolution issued by the State Government dated 13.10.2011. The Government had informed to it's officers to see that time of six months is obtained by the Government before Lok Adalat when the matters are settled. Thus, the Government had expressed that six months period will be sufficient for making arrangement of the money for satisfaction of the award.

4) The learned counsel for petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the orders made by the Division Bench of the Court at Aurangabad in ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/02/2017 00:59:34 ::: W.P.No.8535/16 3 Writ Petition Nos. 6529/2011 and Ors. [Narayan Hiraman Kawal and ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.]. Two orders were made by this Court, one on 1.12.2011 and other on 11.1.2012. In view of the observations made by this Court in these Writ Petitions and aforesaid Government Resolution, this Court holds that it is necessary for the respondents to make the payment of the amount which the respondents have agreed to pay before the Lok Adalat.

5) In the result, the petition is allowed.

The respondents are to make arrangement for payment due to the petitioner within six months from the date of this order.

Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/ ::: Uploaded on - 15/02/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 16/02/2017 00:59:34 :::