46-FA-333-2012.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 46 FIRST APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2012 Govind Pandharinath Rathode (Died) Through L.Rs. Shankar Govindrao Rathode VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another …… Mr. N.P. Jamalpurkar Patil, Advocate for Appellant Mr. S.S. Dande, AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 …… CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 28 SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The present appeal arises out of the Judgment and Award dated 04.08.2011passed by the learned 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nilanga, in Land Acquisition Reference No.4 of 2001. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant has tendered across the Bar a copy of order dated 03.09.2026 passed by this Court in First Appeal No.334 of 2022. He submits that the land of the appellant was acquired from the same village Sangvi (Jewari), Taluka Nilanga, District Latur for the same public purpose i.e. rehabilitation of the earthquake affected persons, and under the very same notification as involved in the said appeal. It is, therefore, contended that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the said order and, consequently, the present appeal deserves to be disposed of in terms thereof. 4. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 fairly concedes the aforesaid position. 2026:BHC-AUG:44551 46-FA-333-2012.odt 2 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, and in view of the admitted position that the controversy involved in the present appeal is identical to the one decided by this Court in First Appeal No.334 of 2012 by order dated03.09.2026, I see no reason to take a different view. The present appeal, therefore, deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said judgment and order. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The Appeal is partly allowed. (ii) The claimants are entitled to receive compensation @Rs.4,50,000/- per hectare and to that extent, impugned award stands modified. (iii) The claimants are entitled to all statutory benefits as per the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 including interest under Section 28 and 34 as per the law laid down by Full Bench of this Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari (2016(3) Mh.L.J. 457. (iv) Rest of the impugned award stands confirmed (v) Modified award be drawn accordingly. (v) Deficit Court fee be paid. (vii) Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE S P Rane