MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of parties. Respective learned Counsel waive notice for respective respondents.

(2.) Petitioner - Municipal Council, Tuljapur acquired certain lands for the purpose of road widening in the year 1989. A notification under section 6 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred to as the said Act) was published on 22-1-1998. After following due procedure, an award was declared by the Collector under section 11 of the said Act on 23-2-1989. Compensation was paid to the parties to the award. After payment of the compensation, the claimants prayed for Reference under section 18 of the Act. Accordingly, reference was made and was dealt with by Civil Judge, Senior Division, osmanabad as L. A. R. Nos. 288/1990, 64/1991, 359/1990, 75/1991 and 65/1991, learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, passed an Award in these References on 2-9-1993, 26-2-2002, 9-3-1994, 1-3-1995 and 8-1-2003 respectively. However, petitioner was not made party to these proceedings before the Civil Judge, Senior division in all these References. By the Award, learned Civil Judge, Senior division, increased the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs. 100/- per sq. metre. After passing the Award, recovery proceedings started. Finally, the collector deducted these amounts on 28th March, 2005 from the octroi grants of the petitioner and deposited the said amount in the Court for making payment to the claimants. In view of these deductions, petitioner came to know that such awards are passed by Civil Judge, Senior Division. On making enquiry, it was found that the petitioner was not made a party to these Awards and notices were also not issued to the petitioner. The petitioner, therefore, has filed the present petition for quashing and setting aside the Awards passed by the Reference Court in above referred References.

(3.) The parties are heard. It is not in dispute that in all these References petitioner was not made a party. It is also not in dispute that the matter is no longer res integra. The law is laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of M/s neyvely Lignite Corpn. Ltd vs. Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Neyvely and ors. , reported in AIR 1995 SC 1004. In the similar situation, the Apex Court observed in para 13 of the Judgment that : "suffice it to state that when the beneficiary for whose benefit the land is acquired is served with the notice and brought on record at the stage of enquiry by the Collector and reference Court under section 18 or in an appeal under section 54, it/they would be interested to defend the award under section 11 or 26 or would file an appeal independently under section 54 etc. against the enhanced compensation. As a necessary or proper party affected by the determination of higher compensation, the beneficiary must have a right to challenge the correctness of the award made by the Reference Court under section 18 or in appeal under section 54 etc. " In this view of the matter, the Apex Court did not approve the conclusions reached by the High Court that the beneficiary is not a party interested. It is therefore apparent that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, as the petitioner was not a party to the Land Acquisition Reference, the judgment rendered in the references concerned, cannot be sustained.