VANDANA DATTATRAY JAMKHAVALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners are taking exception to the terms of settlement arrived at in a Lok Adalat held on 7/2/2011 (Exhibit - C), whereby reference preferred by them under sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for enhancement of the compensation which was numbered as Land Acquisition Reference No. 44 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Shirgonda, was disposed of by passing an award on the basis of the terms of settlement under challenge.

(2.) We have heard both the sides finally at the stage of admission.

(3.) Mr. Kale, learned advocate for the petitioner would take us through the record and proceedings of the reference Court and would submit that a Lok Adalat was organised under the provisions of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (Act of 1987). There was no notice to the petitioners regarding the Lok Adalat. The petitioners were not served with any notice, as required by sec. 19 and 20 of the Act of 1987. Their matter was kept in the Lok Adalat for settlement without their concurrence. The settlement was certified behind their back and without their signatures. It would be a forced settlement and, therefore, in absence of any notice to the petitioners and without their signatures, the terms of settlement certified by the Lok Adalat be quashed and set aside.