MAHADEAO RAMA VAIDYA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties had stated that all these Appeals under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as '1894 Act') are connected and can be decided together finally at the stage of admission itself. Accordingly they have also filed written notes of argument and have also supplied Xerox copies of citations and also addressed this Court orally in brief. It is not in dispute that acquisition in this case has been at the instance of Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, M.I.D.C. for short, a statutory body under the provisions of Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as '1961 Act'). Land Acquisition Officer of State Government at Chandrapur has conducted the acquisition proceedings in Land Acquisition Case 11/65 -- 91/92 in respect of lands situated at village Yerur, District Chandrapur under Section 32/33 of 1961 Act. Agricultural lands of Appellants/landowners have been acquired by M.I.D.C. for purpose of establishing additional Industrial area. Notification under Section 32 (2) of 1961 Act came to be published on 19/3/1992 (equivalent to one U/S. 4 of 1894 Act) and final order of acquisition/award has been passed on 10/1/1995. Land Acquisition Officer has sanctioned compensation between Rs.22,000/- per Hectare to Rs.33,000/- per Hectare for the dry crop land and irrigated/ Paddy land to these landowners. They then approached Collector for making reference as required by section 34 of 1961 Act and accordingly the proceedings reached Joint Civil Judge (Senior Division) Chandrapur. Said court decided all reference proceedings together on 19/4/2007 sanctioning rate of Rs.37,000/- per Hectare for dry crop land and Rs.45,000/- per Hectare for irrigated land. Present Appeals are thereafter filed by landowners seeking rate of Rs.1 lakh per Hectare for dry crop land and Rs. 1.5 lakh per Hectare for irrigated land. M.I.D.C. has also filed Appeals for quashing the enhancement granted.

(2.) First Appeal No. 961/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 78/1996. First Appeal No. 962/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 77/1996. First Appeal No. 351/2008 is filed by M.I.D.C. against said adjudication. First Appeal No. 963/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 58/1996. First Appeal No. 964/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 69/1996 while First Appeal No. 350/2008 is filed by M.I.D.C. against very same adjudication. First Appeal No. 965/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 70/1996. First Appeal No. 971/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 74/1996. First Appeal Stamp no.13723/2007 is filed by M.I.D.C. against this adjudication in land acquisition reference 74/1996. As there is delay of 33 days in filing it, C.A. 8595/2007 is preferred by it seeking its condonation. First Appeal 1003/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 5/1996 & First Appeal No. 476/2008 is filed by M.I.D.C. against it. First Appeal No. 1005/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 72/1996. First Appeal No. 349/2008 is filed by M.I.D.C. against adjudication in land acquisition reference 72/1996. First Appeal No. 1006/2007 is filed by landowners against adjudication in land acquisition reference 59/1996. First Appeal No. 1007/2007 is filed by landowners & First Appeal No. 352/2008 is filed by M.I.D.C. against adjudication in land acquisition reference 75/1996 .

(3.) In First Appeal Stamp no.13723/2007 filed by M.I.D.C. against the adjudication in land acquisition reference 74/1996 there is delay of 33 days & C.A. 8595/2007 is for its condonation. In view of First Appeal 971/2007 filed by landowners against that adjudication which is yet to be admitted and as all matters are being disposed of finally at the stage of admission, landowners have given their no objection to condone said delay of 33 days as after admission of landowner s First Appeal, M.I.D.C. could have very well filed cross Appeal. Accordingly C.A. 8595/2007 is allowed and office is directed to register First Appeal Stamp no.13723/2007.