MOTIRAM ZINGAR WAWRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for adjudication in these Civil Revision Applications filed under Sec. 18 (3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short, "the said Act"] is:-

(2.) The facts in all these revision applications are similar and for sake of convenience reference is made to the facts in Civil Revision Application No. 113 of 2015. The lands of the applicant came to be acquired pursuant to Award dated 10th Feb., 2001 that was passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The lands in question were acquired for the Gosekhurd Irrigation Project. After issuing notice under Sec. 12 (2) of the said Act, the applicant received the amount of compensation. Thereafter, reference proceedings were filed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of notice under Sec. 12 (2) of the said Act. In the meanwhile, on 18th June, 2013, the State Government took a decision to grant compensation under the Rehabilitation Package to the persons affected by the Gosekhurd Irrigation Project. The applicant received compensation under said Package. Thereafter, the applicant sought permission to deposit court fees on the reference application. The Additional Collector held that as the applicant had after filing an undertaking that he would not seek enhancement in the amount of compensation by filing reference under Sec. 18 of the said Act received the amount of compensation under the Rehabilitation Package, he was not entitled to seek permission for depositing court fees. On that basis, the proceedings came to be filed vide Order dated 29th June, 2015. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action, the applicant has filed Civil Revision Application No. 113 of 2015.

(3.) Smt. V. N. Chitnavis, learned counsel for the applicants, submitted that the Additional Collector committed an error by refusing to entertain the reference proceedings and by treating the same to be closed on the ground that the applicants had received compensation under Rehabilitation Package. She submitted that the reference proceedings had been filed within the stipulated period of limitation prescribed by Sec. 18 (2) of the said Act and hence they ought to be adjudicated on merits. It was only if the requirements of Sec. 18 were not fulfilled, that the Additional Collector could refuse to refer the proceedings to the Civil Court. Acceptance of compensation under the Rehabilitation Package of the State Government could not have the effect of depriving the applicants of their statutory right to seek enhancement in the amount of compensation. The undertaking submitted by the applicants while receiving compensation under the Rehabilitation Package would not have the effect of depriving the applicants of their statutory rights. It was, therefore, submitted that the reference proceedings deserve to be entertained on merits. In support of her submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance on the following decisions:-