(1.) By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for writ of mandamus for holding and declaring that Petitioners are entitled for a residential plot and alternate land from the benefited zone of Mahind Pond (Talav) project. Petitioners have also prayed writ of mandamus against respondents to issue notice under sec. 16(2)(a) of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999.
(2.) It is an admitted position that petitioners' lands had been acquired by the State Government since the same were submerged under the Mahind Pond (Talav) project in the year 1996-99. The Special Land Acquisition Officer issued notice under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and after following procedure, acquired the land. After making an Award, the Special Acquisition Officer issued notice under Sec. 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the Petitioners for receiving payment of compensation, sometime in the year 2000.
(3.) The case of the petitioners now is that since no notice under Sec. 16(2)(a) of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999 for deposit of 65% of the amount was issued, the Petitioners did not deposit the said amount to enable the State Government to allot residential plot of their choice. He submitted that time to pay such amount did not commence and thus directions be issued to the respondents to issue such notice under sec. 16(2)(a) at the first instance and to give opportunity to the petitioners to deposit 65% amount. In support of this submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon on the Judgment of this Court delivered on 7/2/2017 in Writ Petition No. 8988 of 2013 in case of Dadabhau Pandurang Agarkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others and connected Writ Petitions.