Bombay High Court
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MEDIUM PROJECT, OSMANABADversusSHAMRAO LAXMANRAO GAIKWAD (DEAD) THRO. LRS. SONABAI SHAMRAO GAIKWAD AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Admitted/Allowed/Granted/Rule Absolute
Holding
The appeal is dismissed as there is no reason to intervene given the State Government's policy.
Summary
The Executive Engineer, Medium Project, Osmanabad filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal against a 2012 judgment that enhanced compensation in a land acquisition case. The appeal challenged the award, arguing that the reference court's enhancement did not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The State Government's policy resolution of 2016, as amended, stipulated that it would not contest enhancements up to four times the original award. The High Court, noting this policy and finding no merit to intervene, dismissed the appeal. Consequently, any pending civil applications related to the matter were also disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the appeal challenging the compensation award should be entertained despite the State Government's policy not to contest enhancements up to four times the original award.
- Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- appeal
- condonation of delay
- reference court
- government policy
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:46255
CA 8270/14
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
931 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8270 OF 2014
IN FAST/16056/2014
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MEDIUM PROJECT, OSMANABAD
VERSUS
SHAMRAO LAXMANRAO GAIKWAD (DEAD) THRO. LRS. SONABAI SHAMRAO
GAIKWAD AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sangle Shirish G.
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Dande
...
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8271 OF 2014
IN FAST/16056/2014
…
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : September 30, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Civil application is filed by the acquiring body for condonation of delay
in filing the appeal. For the averments made in the application, the
application is allowed. Delay is condoned.
2. As the acquisition proceeding is of the year 1993, heard finally with
the consent of the learned counsel for acquiring body and the learned AGP.
3. By this appeal, the Appellant assails the Judgment and award dated
13.9.2012 passed by the learned Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Omerga,
Dist. Osmanabad in LAR No. 85/2009.
4. Both the learned advocates submit that the compensation enhanced
by the learned Reference Court does not exceed four times the amount
awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. They submit that the SLAO has
awarded total compensation of Rs.1,38,250/- whereas the learned reference
court has enhanced compensation of Rs.1,53,250/- in addition to the
CA 8270/14
2
compensation awarded by SLAO.
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 Appeal is dismissed.
7. In view of dismissal of Appeal, pending Civil Applications, if any, do
not survive and are disposed of accordingly.
( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )
ssc/
Checking your session…