LAWS(BOM)-2022-7-277

VIJAY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On July 08, 2022
VIJAY Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) All these petitions raise common questions of fact and law and, therefore, they are being decided together by this common judgment. However, in order to understand the facts pleaded and the prayers made in each of the petitions, it is necessary that their summary is made. Their summary is given in the ensuing paragraphs.

(3.) This petition is filed by seven petitioners. They claim to be the tenants of one shop block each on Kelibag Road, Mahal, Nagpur. The details of their tenancy are mentioned in Paragraph 1 of the petition. These petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned declaration dtd. 16/10/2020 issued by the respondent No.2- Collector, Nagpur, under Sec. 126(4) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, "the MRTP Act") read with Sec. 19 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, "the LA Act of 2013) and, therefore, they seek its quashing, as being violative of the provisions of the LA Act of 2013. By this declaration, the respondent No.2- Collector, Nagpur, declared that the land abutting Central Avenue Road from Badkas Square-Kotwali Police Station Square to C.P. and Berar College Road (for short, "the Kelibag Road land") was needed for the public purpose of road widening. The petitioners have also sought a declaration that the impugned award dtd. 9/2/2021 passed by the respondent- Sub-Divisional Officer and Land Acquisition Officer (City), Nagpur, in Land Acquisition Case No.4/A/65/2020-21 is neither binding upon them nor can they be dispossessed from their respective shop blocks pursuant to the impugned award. The petitioners have sought further reliefs such as to declare that the respondents cannot dispossess the petitioners from their respective shop blocks and to restrain the respondents from dispossessing the petitioners from their respective shop blocks without following due procedure of law, as provided under the LA Act of 2013.