62-WP.8227.2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 62 WRIT PETITION NO. 8227 OF 2021 Gahininath Dudhaji Bade And Others VERSUS The State of Maharashtra And Others ... Mr. S. R. Karad a/w. Mr. Y. L. Bidve, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. Anand Chawre with Ms. Vandana Sadawarte, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5. … CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026 PER COURT : 1. At the outset, the learned Advocate for the Petitioners seeks leave to correct the cause title by showing Petitioner No. 6 in his individual capacity and by deleting the words “Shrikshetra Nagnath Sansthan, Manur, through the Priest”. 2. Leave granted. 3. The only grievance in the petition by all these Petitioners is that the amount of compensation was not paid to them by the acquiring body. During the pendency of the petition, it is now submitted that Petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 have already received the amount of compensation towards the acquisition. In the case of Petitioner No. 6, though he is the owner of Land Gut Nos. 455 and 462 from Village Badewadi, Taluka Shirur (Kasar), District Beed, the compensation is Sayyed 1/3 2026:BHC-AUG:39938 62-WP.8227.2021.doc still pending. 4. In the petition, a reply has been filed by the Government. It is the case of the Respondents that since the Petitioner has shown himself as a priest of the Sansthan and the name of the Sansthan is not shown to be the owner of the said property, it is disputed as to whom the amount needs to be paid. It is also pointed out that a letter was issued to the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Beed, seeking particulars about the Trust named “Shrikshetra Nagnath Sansthan”. However, no such information has been received. It is only for this reason that the Government did not pay the amount of compensation to Petitioner No. 6. The whole confusion is only because of the wrong nomenclature of Petitioner No. 6, as he has shown himself to be a priest of the Sansthan. It is now pointed out to this Court that the name of the present Petitioner appears in the record. In the petition, his name is shown as Nagesh Puranik Manurkar Maharaj, whereas in the Revenue Record, his name is shown as Guru Virupaksha Shivacharya Maharaj Manurkar. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners has invited attention of this Court to a Gazette notice publication, wherein the name of Nagesh Vishwanath Puranik was changed to Guru Virupaksha Shivacharya Manurkar Maharaj. He, therefore, submits that he was shown to be a priest when the Notification was issued on 12.07.2018. 5. This Court had issued notice that the award was passed in 2023, whereas the name of the Petitioner was changed in the year 2018. It is Sayyed 2/3 62-WP.8227.2021.doc only after the award was passed that a mutation entry was changed in the name of the Petitioner on 22.02.2024. Till today, there is no response from the office of the Charity Commissioner to the letter issued by the Government. 6. There is one more factor, i.e., the Petitioner has now received Heirship Certificate No. 167, whereby he is declared as the legal heir of one Guru Kiri Shivacharya Manukar Maharaj. Mr. Chawre, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5, rightly points out that, in the said certificate, it is clearly mentioned that the Petitioner is declared as the legal heir of the deceased only formally and that no one shall claim any right in the property of the deceased, and his heirship shall not cause prejudice to anybody’s right. 7. Considering the above, it is clear that legal heirship is not sufficient to claim the compensation for the land acquired. In view of this, the Petitioner as well as the Respondents have produced relevant documents on record. 8. Considering all these disputed questions of facts, this Court finds that it would not be appropriate to entertain the writ petition. It is open for Petitioner No. 6 to claim his rights in the property independently and thereafter claim the compensation. 9. Keeping all these points open, the writ petition stands disposed off as not maintainable. (JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (KISHORE C. SANT, J.) Sayyed 3/3