HARIBHAU Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the challenge pertains to Land acquisition and interim orders are operating against the respondents, the matter has been heard finally by making Rule returnable forthwith at the request of Shri Parchure, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs. Dangre, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents No. 1 & 2 and Shri Dhatrak, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 Public Trust for which the lands of the petitioners are being acquired.

(2.) Shri Parchure, learned counsel has pointed out that in in earlier Writ Petition No. 650 of 2001 filed by these petitioners challenging Notification dated 04.05.2000 under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the subsequent notification dated3 01.02.2001 under Section 6 thereof and notices under Section 9 were also questioned. That writ petition was disposed of on 20.08.2009 by Division Bench of this Court after noticing that Section 5 A of Land Acquisition Act is in two parts and the later part which required proper application of mind by Government/ Commissioner was not fulfilled. The Court noted that Commissioner simply made report on the basis of the report submitted by Land Acquisition Officer without considering all objections raised by the petitioners. The objections like acquisition being malafide under the pressure of Respondent No. 3 or then availability of sufficient non agricultural land which could have been acquired in preference to their agricultural land were found ignored by Land Acquisition Officer and also by the Commissioner. The matter was, therefore, sent not back to the Commissioner with a direction to consider the objections and report submitted by Land Acquisition Officer.

(3.) Shri Parchure, learned counsel contends that even after remand, consideration by Land Acquisition Officer or by the4 Commissioner again suffers from very same error and notification under Section 6 has been published mechanically. He contends that as acquisition is under pressure of President of Respondent No. 3 Trust, the objections raised by the petitioners, though relevant, have not been looked into. He has invited our attention to those objections also. In this background, our attention is also invited to consideration thereof from records of land acquisition matter made available by learned Additional Government Pleader.