SATYANARAYAN R DEBEY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule, by consent of Counsel returnable forthwith. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents wave service. By consent of Counsel and at their request taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) The petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of acquisition proceedings under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, and the final notification dated 11th May, 2006 issued by the State Government in exercise of the power conferred by section 14. The State Government had decided to acquire the land for the following public purposes, namely :

(3.) The acquisition proceedings which have been questioned by the petitioners were the subject-matter of an earlier challenge before this Court in Writ Petition (Lodging) 1477 of 2006 (S. Ramkrishna Nayak Vs. State of Maharashtra). The petition came to be dismissed by an order dated 13th September, 2006. The order passed by this Court was confirmed in appeal (Appeal 793 of 2006) by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. M. Lodha and hon'ble Mr. Justice S. A. Bobde on 15th November, 2006. This Court inter alia held that upon the vesting of the land in the acquiring body, the remedy of the land owner was to espouse the claim for compensation and in view of the law laid down by the Supreme court, the exercise of the jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution was not warranted. The order of the Court reads thus: