Bombay High Court
GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusUDDHAV PIRAJI SOLANKE AND ANR
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appeals are dismissed as the enhanced compensation does not exceed four times the original award and the State's policy precludes any challenge.
Summary
The appellants challenged a 2009 judgment that awarded compensation for land acquisition, contending that the reference court had enhanced the compensation beyond permissible limits. The State Government, through a policy resolution, stated it would not contest enhancements up to four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The learned Attorney General argued that the enhanced rate of Rs. 89 per square metre did not exceed four times the original Rs. 79 per square metre. The bench examined the policy and found no basis to intervene, noting that the enhancement fell within the stipulated four‑fold ceiling. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed, and any pending civil applications for delay condonation were ordered to be disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the reference court's enhancement of compensation exceeding the Land Acquisition Officer's award can be challenged under the State's policy.
- Whether the appeals should be dismissed in view of the four‑times enhancement ceiling.
- Whether pending civil applications for delay condonation survive after dismissal of the appeals.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- four times rule
- government resolution
- appeal dismissed
- delay condonation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:27128
CA 8118/11 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
41 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8118 OF 2011 IN FAST/12119/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8098 OF 2011 IN FAST/12408/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8085 OF 2011 IN FAST/12387/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8110 OF 2011 IN FAST/12429/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8111 OF 2011 IN FAST/12429/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8112 OF 2011 IN FAST/12429/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8088 OF 2011 IN FAST/12402/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8089 OF 2011 IN FAST/12402/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8093 OF 2011 IN FAST/12435/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8094 OF 2011 IN FAST/12397/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8099 OF 2011 IN FAST/12408/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8100 OF 2011 IN FAST/12419/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8109 OF 2011 IN FAST/12413/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8090 OF 2011 IN FAST/12402/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8114 OF 2011 IN FAST/12392/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8086 OF 2011 IN FAST/12387/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8087 OF 2011 IN FAST/12387/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8097 OF 2011 IN FAST/12408/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8102 OF 2011 IN FAST/12419/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8092 OF 2011 IN FAST/12435/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8103 OF 2011 IN FAST/12424/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8104 OF 2011 IN FAST/12424/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8105 OF 2011 IN FAST/12424/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8107 OF 2011 IN FAST/12413/2011
WITH
CA 8118/11 & Ors.
2
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8091 OF 2011 IN FAST/12435/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8096 OF 2011 IN FAST/12397/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8108 OF 2011 IN FAST/12413/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8095 OF 2011 IN FAST/12397/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8113 OF 2011 IN FAST/12392/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8116 OF 2011 IN FAST/12119/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8117 OF 2011 IN FAST/12119/2011
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8101 OF 2011 IN FAST/12419/2011
GODAVARI MARATHWADA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD
VERSUS
ANGAD VYANKATRAO SOLANKE AND ANR
…
Advocate for applicants/appellants : Mr. Sambhaji S. Tope
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. D.R. Korde
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : July 07, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the Appellants and Mr. D.R. Korde,
learned AGP for State.
2. In civil applications filed for delay condonation, for the reasons
stated in the applications, the applications are allowed. Delay is condoned.
3. By these appeals, the Appellants assail the Judgment and award
dated 2.5.2009 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division,
Ahmedpur in L.A.R. No.160 of 2007 and other connected matters arising
out of same acquisition proceedings.
4. Mr. D.R. Korde, learned AGP submits that the SLAO has granted
compensation at the rate of Rs.79/- per Sq. mtrs. and the reference court
has enhanced the same at the rate of Rs. 89/- per Sq. Mtrs. He therefore,
CA 8118/11 & Ors.
3
submits that the compensation enhanced by the learned Reference Court
does not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition
Officer.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions and having regard to the
policy decision of the State Government contained in Government
Resolution No.Sankirna-2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham-1/A-4 dated 03.11.2016
with Corrigendum dated 23.02.2017 and 13.08.2018 to the said
Government Resolution, took a decision not to challenge the reference, if
compensation is enhanced only upto four times.
6. Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the impugned
order. Hence, the present Appeals are dismissed.
7. The Claimants are at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited by
the State/acquiring body before the learned Reference Court, if any.
8. In view of dismissal of the Appeals, pending Civil Applications, if any,
do not survive and are disposed of accordingly.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…