1 fa3868.17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 3868 OF 2017 Mahadeo s/o Haribhau Shinde age 52 yrs. Occ. Agril. r/o Kedarwakadi, Tq. Mantha, Dist. Jalna … Appellant Orig. Petitioner VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Jalna, 2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Works, Jalna, 3] The Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist. Parbhani … Respondents WITH FIRST APPEAL NO. 3869 OF 2017 Sakhubai w/o Tukaram Shinde, age 52 years, occ. Agril., R/o Kedarwakdi, Tq.Mantha, District Jalna. … Appellant Orig. Petitioner VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Jalna, District Jalna, 2 fa3868.17 2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Works, Jalna, 3] The Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist. Parbhani … Respondents FIRST APPEAL NO. 3285 OF 2017 Balasaheb s/o Tulshiram Late (died L.Rs.) 1] Sarubai w/o Babasaheb Late, age major, occ. Agril., r/o Kedarwakadi, Tq.Mantha, Dist. Jalna, 2] Sudhakar s/o Babasaheb Late, age major, occ. Agril., r/o as above, 3] Kamlakar s/o Babasaheb Late, age major, occ. Agril., r/o as above … Appellants Orig. Petitioners VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Jalna, District Jalna, 2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Works, Jalna, 3] The Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist. Parbhani … Respondents 3 fa3868.17 FIRST APPEAL NO. 3287 OF 2017 Sheshrao s/o Thavra Rathod, age 42 years, occ. Agril., r/o Kedarwakadi, Tq.Mantha, Dist. Jalna, … Appellant Orig. Petitioner VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Jalna, District Jalna, 2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Works, Jalna, 3] The Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist. Parbhani … Respondents FIRST APPEAL NO. 3288 OF 2017 Kundlik s/o Ashroba Kavhale, age 43 years, occ. Agril., r/o Kedarwakadi, Tq.Mantha, Dist. Jalna, … Appellants Orig. Petitioners VERSUS 1] The State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Jalna, District Jalna, 2] The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Minor Irrigation Works, Jalna, 3] The Executive Engineer, Nimna Dudhana Project, Sailu, Dist. Parbhani … Respondents 4 fa3868.17 ..... Mr. Kailas B. Jadhav, advocate for the appellants Mr. A.M.Phule, Mr. B.A.Shinde, Mr. S.S.Dande A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Mr.S.G.Bhalerao, Mr. S.C.Arora, advocate for respondent no.3 ..... CORAM : K.L.WADANE, J. Reserved On        : 26.09.2017 Pronouncement on   : 05.10.2017 J U D G M E N T  : Heard   Mr. K.B.Jadhav,   learned   counsel appearing   on   behalf   of   the   appellants   in   all Appeals. 2. First   Appeal   Nos. 3868   and   3869   of   2017 have   been   already   admitted   by   this   Court   on 9.8.2017 and are pending. There   are   connected   First   Appeal   Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017. Admit. Mr. A.M.Phule,   Mr. B.A.Shinde   and S.S.Dande learned A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. S.C.Bora, learned counsel for respondent no.3 waive service of notice on admission in above appeals. 5 fa3868.17 3. With   the   consent   of   learned   counsel   for the parties, the appeals are taken up for final hearing. The parties are referred by their original status. 4. The   present   appeals   are   filed   by   the appellants for enhancement of compensation awarded to them by the learned District Judge­2, Jalna by judgment   and   award,   passed   in   Land   Acquisition Reference Nos. 41 of 2001 and No. 202 of 2002 on 22.8.2008, and in Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 23   of   2001,   338   of   2002   and   No.   38   of   2001   on 25.7.2008. Lands   of   the   appellants   in   all   the appeals   were   acquired   for   Nimna   Dudhana   Project from   the   village   Kedarwakadi,   Taluka   Mantha, District Jalna. 5. The appellants in First Appeal Nos. 3868 and 3869 of 2017 claimed that their lands acquired for   the   said   project   were   of   irrigated,   non­ irrigated   with   fruit   bearing   trees. In   First 6 fa3868.17 Appeal   Nos. 3285,   3287   and   3288   of   2017,   the appellants claimed that their lands acquired for the   said   project   were   of   non­irrigated/Jirayat lands. Therefore, the claim of the appellants is to   be   determined   as   per   their   categorization   of the acquired lands. 6. The   evidence   in   support   of   claim   of   the claimants/appellants   is   considered   in   Land Acquisition Reference No. 181 of 2001 as the basis for   deciding   other   Land   Acquisition   References. Hence, the said evidence is adopted for decision of these appeals. 7. It was the case of the appellants before the   Special   Land   Acquisition   Officer   that   Lands owned   by   the   appellant   situated   at   village Kedarwakadi,   Taluka   Mantha,   District   Jalna   are irrigated, non­irrigated with fruit bearing trees in   First   Appeal   Nos. 3868   and   3869   of   2017   and non­irrigated/Jirayat   in   First   Appeal   Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017. As aforesaid, lands were 7 fa3868.17 acquired   by   the   respondents   for   Nimna   Dudhana Project. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was   published   in   the   Maharashtra   Government Gazette on 13.5.1995. Notice under Section 12(1) of the Act was issued on or about 2.6.1999. The possession   of   the   acquired   lands   and   other structures and trees were taken on different dates as   per   the   documents   produced   on   record   and payment   of   compensation   was   made   on   or   about 2.6.1999,   which   was   accepted   by   the   petitioner under protest. 8. The   Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total compensation for the lands acquired of   the   respective   appellants   at   the   rate   of Rs.1,800/­ per Are in First Appeal Nos. 3868 and 3869   of   2017   and   Rs.1,200/­   per   Are   in   First Appeal Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017 and for Potkharab land at the rate of Rs.600/­ per Are as follows : ­ 8 fa3868.17 In   Land   acquisition   Reference   No.   41   of 2001 for land 1 Hectare 06 Are from Gut No. 43/1C, the   claimants   claimed   compensation   before   the Special   Land   Acquisition   Officer   Rs. 2,07,112/­ and   the   Special   Land   Acquisition   Officer   has awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,10,888/­. In Land acquisition Reference No. 202 of 2000 for land 0.35 Hectare from Gut No. 43/2A, the claimants claimed compensation before the Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   Rs. 1,10,567/­   and   the Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total compensation of Rs. 38,903/­. In   Land   acquisition   Reference   No.   23   of 2001 for land 0.82 Hectare from Gut No. 7/4, the claimants claimed compensation before the Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   Rs. 82,935/­   and   the Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total compensation of Rs. 53,792/­. In Land acquisition Reference No. 338 of 2002 for land 1.24 Hectare from Gut No. 22/4B, the claimants claimed compensation before the Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   Rs. 1,50,000/­   and   the 9 fa3868.17 Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total compensation   of   Rs. 82,366/­   including   for Potkharab land 0.02 Hectare. In   Land   acquisition   Reference   No.   38   of 2001 for land 4.43 Hectare from Gut No. 10/1, the claimants claimed compensation before the Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   Rs. 4,07,667/­   and   the Special Land Acquisition Officer has awarded total compensation of Rs. 3,01,883/­ including potkharab land of 0.10 hectare. 9. Being   aggrieved   by   the   amount   of compensation   awarded   by   the   Special   Land Acquisition   Officer,   the   appellants   preferred Applications under Section 18 of the Act to the Collector,   Jalna,   who   forwarded   it   for adjudication to the District Judge, Jalna. Before Reference Court, the appellants claimed compensation   at   the   rate   of   Rs.2,00,000/­   per hectare for non­irrigated land, Rs.3,00,000/­ for seasonally   irrigated   land   and   Rs.4,00,000/­   for perennially irrigated land including consequential 10 fa3868.17 benefits such as solatium, component and interest as   provided   under   the   Act. The   claimants   also claimed additional compensation for trees and well in their acquired lands. 10. Common   grounds   raised   by   the   appellants before   the   Reference   Court   were   that   the   the Special   Land   Acquisition   Officer   has   not considered   the   quality   of   land,   fertility   and advantageous situation. No legal inquiries were made. The appellants claim that the Special Land Acquisition Officer has not considered the income of the lands. The respondents have totally ignored the   factors   required   to   be   considered   while determining   the   compensation   as   provided   under Section 23 of the Act. The method compared and adopted   of   the   ready   recknor   is   unsuitable   for awarding   just   compensation   to   the   petitioners. The sale instances considered by the Special Land Acquisition   Officer   did   not   reflect   correct   and proper market value of the acquired lands. 11 fa3868.17 11. Petitioners   have   also   submitted   that village   Kedarwakadi   is   connected   to   Bageshwari Sahakari   Sakhar   Karkhana. The   lands   acquired   of the petitioners were fertile lands. The Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   ought   to   have   awarded compensation   at   the   rate   of   Rs.25,000/­   to Rs.30,000/­ per Are. Thus, the petitioners have prayed   to   grant   enhanced   compensation   for   their lands acquired. 12. The   State/respondents   resisted   the   claim contending   that   the   enhancement   in   compensation claimed   by   the   petitioners   is   exorbitant   and liable   to   be   rejected. The   Special   Land Acquisition   Officer   has   properly   considered   the situation of lands under acquisition and assessed the market price for determining the  compensation by considering the other factors on the date of Section   4   notification. The   Special   Land Acquisition   Officer   has   classified   the   lands   on the basis of its quality of soil assessment and other   factors. The   Special   Land   Acquisition 12 fa3868.17 Officer   has   also   considered   the   genuine   sale instances. The award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is based upon sound and cogent reasons. The   amount   of   compensation   awarded   is adequate and hence, the respondents contended that the   petitioners   are   not   entitled   for   enhanced amount of compensation. Thus, the respondents have prayed   that   the   Applications   deserve   to   be dismissed. 13. Reference   Court   has   observed   in   the judgment   that   the   petitioners   have   not   produced and   proved   the   valuation   report   in   support   of their claim for fruit bearing trees.   No expert opinion   as   mentioned   in   the   petition   as   regards additional   compensation   for   well   is   produced   on record.  Hence, no separate amount of compensation is granted by the Reference Court in respect of well and trees. 14. Considering   the   oral   and   documentary evidence produced on record, the Reference Court 13 fa3868.17 held that the compensation awarded by the Special Land   Acquisition   Officer   is   inadequate,   and therefore,   the   petitioners   in   First   Appeal   Nos. 3868   and 3869 of 2017 are entitled for enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.1,800/­ per Are for their   irrigated/non­irigated   lands   with   fruit bearing trees and in First Appeal Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017 the petitioners are entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.1,200/­ per Are for their   non­irrigated/Jirayat   lands,   with     other benefits considering the crop inspection column of 7/12 extracts.  Reference Court granted the amount of compensation as below : ­ __________________________________________________ LAR No Gut No.  Area   Ref. Court  SLAO    Diff. H. Are   awarded    awarded 41/01 43/1C 1.06 190800 110888 79912 202/00 43/2A 0.35 63000 38903 24097 23/01 7/4 0.82 98400 53792 44608 338/02 22/4B 1.24 148000 82336 67634 38/01 10/1 4.43 531600      301683  235767 14 fa3868.17 15. The   present   appeals   are   filed   by   the claimants   seeking   enhancement   in   the   amount   of compensation awarded by the Reference Court. 16. I   have   heard   the   arguments   of   both   the learned   counsel   for   the   parties   and   perused   the oral and documentary evidence produced on record. 17. Learned   counsel   for   the   appellants contended   that   the   award   under   challenge   is erroneous   and   is   passed   without   proper appreciation of evidence on record.  The amount of compensation   awarded   by   the   Reference   Court   is very   meagre,   insufficient,   inadequate   looking   to the   quality   of   lands,   fertility   and   advantages situation.   The   Reference   Court   ought   to   have enhanced   the   compensation   properly   for   the acquired lands. 18. Learned   counsel   for   the   appellants produced on record the judgment delivered by this Court in First Appeal No. 2649 of 2017 along with 15 fa3868.17 group of appeals, decided on 31.8.2017 arising out of the Land Acquisition References in respect of the lands acquired from village Kedarwakdi, Taluka Mantha, District Jalna for Nimna Dudhana Project. 19. I   have   gone   through   the   said   judgment. This Court held that appellants in those appeals are   entitled   for   compensation   for   the   acquired lands at the rate of Rs.1,500/­ per Are for non­ irrigated   lands,   Rs./2250/­   per   Are   for   semi­ irrigated   lands   and   Rs.3,000/­   per   Are   for perennially   irrigated   lands   along   with   the statutory   benefits   and   interest   on   the   enhanced amount   of   compensation   as   per   provisions   of   the Act in respect of the lands acquired from village Kedarwakdi,   Taluka   Mantha,   District   Jalna   for Nimna Dudhana Project.   As stated above in First Appeal Nos. 3868   and 3869 of 2017 the lands of appellants   are   irrigated/non­irigated   lands   with fruit bearing trees and in First Appeal Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017 the lands of appellants are non­irrigated/Jirayat   lands. Therefore,   the 16 fa3868.17 appellants in First Appeal Nos. 3868  and 3869 of 2017   are   entitled   for   enhanced   compensation   for their acquired lands at the rate of Rs.2,250/­ per Are and in First Appeal Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017 the appellants are entitled for enhanced compensation for their acquired lands at the rate of Rs.1,500/­ per Are. 20. In the result, I pass following order. (i)     Appeals are partly allowed. (ii)     The   market   value   of   the   lands involved in the present appeals shall be determined   as   per   their   categorization. The  appellants   in   First   Appeal   Nos. 3868  and 3869 of 2017 are entitled for enhanced compensation   for their acquired   lands   at   the   rate   of Rs.2,250/­ per Are and in First Appeal Nos. 3285, 3287 and 3288 of 2017 the appellants   are   entitled   for   enhanced compensation   for  their   acquired   lands at the rate of Rs.1,500/­ per Are. 17 fa3868.17 (iii)     The appellants are held entitled to the statutory benefits and interest on the   enhanced   amount   of   compensation   in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Interest under Section 34 of the Act shall be   paid   from   the   date   of   Award   under Section 11 of the Act even on the amount of compensation awarded by the Reference Court. (K.L.WADANE, J.) dbm