Skip to content


Bapu Ramji Pawar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberSpecial Civil Appln. Nos. 2001, 2028, 2029, 2157 and 2158 of 1972
Judge
Reported inAIR1978Bom282
ActsLand Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 5-A and 6; Constitution of India - Article 14
AppellantBapu Ramji Pawar
RespondentThe State of Maharashtra and anr.
Appellant AdvocateS.D. Mogre, Adv. for ;A.V. Savant and ;Premji Baburao Sawant, Advs.
Respondent AdvocateC.J. Sawant, Addl. Govt. Pleader
Excerpt:
a) the court ruled that resettlement of persons affected by the irrigation project constituted public purpose, within the meaning of section 6 of the land acquisition act, 1894, as the same was meant for welfare of large section of a community.;b) the court ruled that in the event of acquisition of land, the classification of persons on the basis of total land was not arbitrary or in violation of article 14 of the constitution of india. ;c) the court held that the inquiry that was conducted under section 5-a of the land acquisition act, 1894 was not to be vitiated, on the mere ground that the inquiry officer had acted on the directions contained in the resolution passed by the government. - - 6. all these petitions must, therefore, fail.jahagirdar, j.1. these five petitions seek to challenge acquisition proceedings under the land acquisition act pursuant to a notification issued under section 6 of the act by the commissioner of poona division,2. by that notification under section 6 of the act, the commissioner of poona division declared that several lands mentioned in that notification and situated at village udtare in wai taluka of satara district were required for the public purpose specified in the notification. that purpose was for resettlement of the persons affected by the krishna-dhom project.3. in special civil application no.2001 of 1972 the lands involved are gat nos. 1531. 1613 and 189; in special civil application no. 2029 of 1972 the land involved is gat no. 272; gat no. 1020 is the land acquisition of which.....
Judgment:

Jahagirdar, J.

1. These five petitions seek to challenge acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act pursuant to a notification issued under Section 6 of the Act by the Commissioner of Poona Division,

2. By that notification under Section 6 of the Act, the Commissioner of Poona Division declared that several lands mentioned in that notification and situated at village Udtare in Wai Taluka of Satara District were required for the public purpose specified in the notification. That purpose was for resettlement of the persons affected by the Krishna-Dhom Project.

3. In Special Civil Application No.2001 of 1972 the lands involved are Gat Nos. 1531. 1613 and 189; in Special Civil Application No. 2029 of 1972 the land involved is Gat No. 272; Gat No. 1020 is the land acquisition of which is challenged in Special Civil Application No. 2028 of 1972; in Special Civil Applications Nos. 2157 and 2158 the lands involved are Gats Nos. 252 and 259 and Nos. 828 and 262 respectively. All the lands, as mentioned, are situate in village Udtare to which the petitioners belong,

4. The challenge to the acquisition as mentioned in the petition is on the ground that the purpose for which the lands are being acquired is for the resettlement of the persons affected by the Krishna-Dhom Project, which purpose is not a public purpose, that the Government Resolution which lays down a scale according to which the lands are to be acquired from various persons and allotted to affected persons is arbitrary and will result in discrimination between persons situate in the same manner and that the inquiry under Section 5-A which was conducted under the Land AcquisitionAct pursuant to the notification issued earlier was not a proper inquiry inasmuch as the Inquiry Officer followed merely the directions contained in the Government Resolution.

5. All these questions have been considered and finally answered in a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Sadashiv Keru Jamdade v. State of Maharashtra : AIR1977Bom355 , wherein it has been held in the first place that the purpose for which the lands are being acquired was a public purpose because it included the welfare of a large section of the community, that the classification on the basis of the total land could not be said to be arbitrary or in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution and further that no challenge could be made to the acquisition of land pursuant to notification issued under Section 6 merely because there was a Government Resolution for the guidance of the acquisition officers. We do not find in these petitions any other ground in addition to the grounds on which the land acquisition had been challenged in the petition decided by the abovementioned judgment.

6. All these petitions must, therefore, fail. Rule is discharged in each of them. No order as to costs.

7. Petitions dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //