klp.PIL.PIP.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 60 OF 2019 1) Tanaji Shantaram Kamble. ] ...Petitioner. Versus 1) The State of Maharashtra Through Ministry of Water Resources. ] ] ] 2) The State of Maharashtra Through Ministry of Relief and Rehabilitation. ] ] ] 3) The District Collector, Sindhudurg – Oras. ] ] ] 4) The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Project, Division Aambadpal, Tal Kudal. ] ] ] ] 5) Commissioner Konkan Division ] ] 6) The Executive Director, Konkan Irrigation Development Committee ] ] ] 7) District Rehabilitation Oicer Project Afected People’s Relief and Rehabilitation, Sindhudurg, Oras. ] ] ] ...Respondents. —————— Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State. —————— Coram : M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ. Date : November 13, 2025. Patil-SR (ch) 1 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc Oral Order (Per Ajit B. Kadethankar, J.) : 1. None for the Petitioner. Apparently, the Public Interest Litigation is pending since 2019. With the able assistance of learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Kalel, we have perused the petition as also the documents enlisted with the petition. 2. Subject-Matter :- The Petitioner contends to be wretched of unorganized rehabilitation of the Aruna Medium Irrigation Project in the Sindhudurg District [hereinafter referred as “AMIP” for the sake of convenience]. He hence predominantly seeks directions to the respondent Authorities to conduct, systematize and expedite rehabilitation of Project Afected Persons of “AMIP”. 3. Considering the prayers made in this petition, we feel it appropriate to dispose of this petition with certain directions. 4. It is stated in the petition that a proposal for acquisition of lands from villages Bhom, Aakavane and Nagabwadi (Nagapwadi) of Sindhudurg district was moved in the year 2005. This acquisition was for construction of a dam on the bank of river Aruna, the project being named as “Aruna Medium Irrigation Project”. 5. The record further reveals that a notiication under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 was published on 9th April 2010. That, Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) Sindhudurg passed an award on 31st October 2012. On 17th November 2018, the Sub Divisional Oicer, Patil-SR (ch) 2 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc Kankavali issued notices to the Petitioner and other project afected persons intimating them about the passing of award. That, further notice dated 1st March 2019 was issued by the Additional Collector, Sindhudurg to the Petitioner and other project afected persons to vacate their houses. 6. Petitioner contends that he is one amongst those project afected persons whose properties were acquired vide the aforesaid land acquisition proceedings. Besides several agitations, a notice came to be issued by the Petitioner to the Respondent Authorities in April 2019 requesting to take steps for their rehabilitation as also for fair compensation for acquisition of their properties. Contending that no favourable response has been advanced by Respondent Authorities, the Petitioner has moved present petition in the year 2019. 7. It seems from the record that since then, the petition has remained pending. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that no instructions are received so far in the matter. 8. From the record it reveals that on 19th July 2019, this Court recorded that although the Petitioner has made a number of prayers in the petition, the Petitioner restricted this petition only to the extent of ‘issue of rehabilitation of villagers from 3 villages, namely, Bhom, Akavane and Nagabwadi (Nagapwadi) of Sindhudurg district’, who happen to be afected by ‘AMIP’. Patil-SR (ch) 3 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc 9. Considering the limited prayer, we deem it appropriate to deal on such prayer and to issue certain directions to the Respondents. 10. There can be no dispute that the Respondent Authorities are legitimately expected to make a suitable provision for the rehabilitation of project afected persons, this being a State policy. If the Respondent Authorities have not yet undertaken any proper exercise to rehabilitate the Petitioner and other project afected persons of “AMIP”, it is the bounden duty of Respondent Authorities to conduct such exercise at the earliest and to ensure that such project afected persons are rehabilitated appropriately and adequately. 11. It will not be out of place to mention that rehabilitation has to be with all civic amenities at par with ordinary residents of common villages. This tempts us to refer to the State Policy “ आधी पुनवसन मग धरण” which is envisaged in Govt. Resolutions which we refer further. 12. Pertinent to note, the Government of India framed a National Rehabilitation Policy in the year 2003. Pursuant to the National Policy of Rehabilitation, the State Government identiied the need of rehabilitation of Project Afected Persons and introduced certain resolutions whereby the State Policy was framed for the State of Maharashtra. The Maharashtra Project Afected Persons Act, 1999 was already passed to lay down the procedure for rehabilitation of project afected persons. Patil-SR (ch) 4 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc 13. It is but obvious that a development creates its consequences. Acquisition of properties of citizen forms part of infrastructural development in the State. These consequences of infrastructural development are of two types, i.e., the consequences which are ‘by virtue’ of the development, and the consequences which are ‘due to’ the development. Acquisition of properties of citizen forms part of infrastructural development in the State, and rehabilitation of project afected persons forms part of the second type of consequence. State is responsible for the consequences and is under obligation to rehabilitate the project afected persons. Hence the Government of Maharashtra has undertaken the principle of ‘rehabilitation irst’ which is seen from the Government Rresolution referred below. 14. It is pertinent to note that on 17th March 2006, the Revenue and Forest Department, Government of Maharashtra has issued the Government Resolution to enforce a realistic State Policy styled as “ आधी पुनवसन मग धरण”. Meaning thereby, rehabilitation of the project afected persons shall be framed and set in motion before the project completes. 15. In view of this, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this Public Interest Litigation with some directions: Patil-SR (ch) 5 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc [i] As per the submission of Mr. Kalel, learned AGP considering the long gap in iling of the present Public Interest Litigation and today’s hearing, the Respondent Authorities might have taken some steps for rehabilitation of the persons afected by Aruna Medium Irrigation Project. [ii] Respondent Nos.2 to 7 shall within the period of six weeks from today undertake an exercise if not already undertaken, to choose and select the suitable place/lands for rehabilitation of the persons afected by Aruna Medium Irrigation Project. [iii] The District Rehabilitation Oicer-Respondent No.7, being the Nodal Rehabilitation Authority for Sindhudurg District, shall ensure that deserving project afected persons are rehabilitated at such place ofered and designated for rehabilitation of the persons afected by Aruna Medium Irrigation Project. [iv] Needless to mention that rehabilitation of project afected persons would be carried out in the light of applicable State Policy by which the project afected persons are identiied, and are rehabilitated in accordance with the State Policy. The Respondent Authorities shall also take into consideration the National Rehabilitation Policy, 2003. Patil-SR (ch) 6 of 7 klp.PIL.PIP.doc [v] Respondent Authorities shall conduct and expedite rehabilitation of the Petitioner and such project afected persons in accordance with the provisions of Maharashtra Project Afected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999. [vi] We have not observed anything regarding the entitlement of Petitioner to get the beneit as a beneiciary or project afected person of Aruna Medium Irrigation Project, Sindhudurg district. Needless to mention, entitlement of the Petitioner or any such other person for being treated as Project Afected Person of the Aruna Medium Irrigation Project shall be subject to its veriication by the the Respondent No.7 and applicable rules, regulations and the State Policy. 16. Respondent-Authorities to ile compliance report in this Court within 16 weeks from today. Needless to mention that it is open for the Petitioner to approach this Court to demonstrate any lapse on the part of the Respondent-Authorities in complying with the directions given by us today. 17. List the petition on 23rd March 2025 for consideration of Compliance Report. [Ajit B. Kadethankar, J.] [M. S. Karnik, J.] Patil-SR (ch) 7 of 7