Bombay High Court
RATAN DINKAR PRADHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court allowed the civil application, directing the disbursement of Rs.7,66,535 to the applicant as per his entitlement.
Summary
The applicant, whose land was acquired, sought compensation under the same award that listed the petitioners. The petitioners had been ordered to withdraw Rs.21,35,347, and the applicant's entitlement was undisputed. Although the applicant was not a petitioner in the related writ petition, the court applied the principle of parity, treating him as similarly situated. The court directed that Rs.7,66,535 be disbursed from the Rs.30,00,000 deposited by Respondent No.2 under the earlier High Court order in WP No.2971/2026, allowing the applicant to withdraw his share. Any surplus after withdrawal was to be returned to Respondent No.4.
Issues considered
- Whether an applicant who is not a petitioner in the original writ petition can claim compensation under the same award
- Whether the principle of parity applies to allow the applicant to withdraw his entitlement
- Whether the court can direct disbursement of funds from the amount deposited by a respondent in a related case
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- parity
- civil application
- writ petition
- disbursement
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40587-DB
{1} 26-ca-9980-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
26 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9980 OF 2026
IN WP/2971/2026
Ratan Dinkar Pradhan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. P.B. Patil, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. V.M. Kagne, AGP for State
.......
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 04th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. This application is filed by the applicant whose land was acquired
and his name appears in the same award wherein the names of the
petitioners appear.
2. Petitioners, by order dated 05.08.2026 were permitted to
withdraw the amount of Rs. 21,35,347/-. The balance amount of
compensation is of the applicant. The applicant’s entitlement is not
disputed by the Respondents.
3. In these peculiar facts and though applicant was not petitioner in
the writ petition, we are inclined to allow the application on the ground
of parity as the applicant is similarly situated like that of petitioners in
{2} 26-ca-9980-2026
the writ petition.
4. The Civil Application is therefore allowed in terms of prayer
clause ‘B’, which is as follows:
“B] The directions may be given to the office of Hon’ble
Court to disburse the amount of Rs. 7,66,535/- out of
the amount of Rs. 30,00,000 deposited by the
respondent no 2 as per order dated 16/04/2026 passed
by the Hon’ble High Court in WP No 2971/2026 and the
Applicant may be permitted to withdraw the said amount
as per his entitlement.”
5. After withdrawal of amount by the applicant, if some amount
remains, the same shall be remitted back in the account of Respondent
No. 4.
(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
Bhagyawant Punde
Checking your session…