Bombay High Court

DATTA S/O KONDIBA PALVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR COLLECTOR, JALNA AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: SIDDHESHWAR SUNDARRAO THOMBRE

Holding

The ex parte orders of the reference court are set aside and the matters are remanded for fresh determination.

Summary

The Zilla Parishad, as the acquiring authority, challenged several ex parte orders of the reference court relating to land acquisition proceedings initiated in 2002. The appellant argued that it had been served but the reference court proceeded without its participation, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court observed that the acquiring body must ultimately pay compensation to claimants and therefore the ex parte orders could not stand. Consequently, the Court quashed the reference court's judgments and orders and remanded the matters back for a fresh hearing within six weeks. The appeals were disposed of, and any amounts deposited were to be transferred with interest to the reference court.

Issues considered

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the reference court are valid in view of the appellant being served but not heard
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to set aside those orders and remand the matters for fresh determination

Subjects

land acquisition
ex parte proceedings
procedural fairness
compensation
quashing orders
remand

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:32083

                                                                         FA 449/16 & Ors.
                                                   1

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  28 FIRST APPEAL NO. 449 OF 2016
                                                 WITH
                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 446 OF 2016
                                                 WITH
                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 448 OF 2016
                                                 WITH
                                    FIRST APPEAL NO. 450 OF 2016
                                                 WITH
                                   FIRST APPEAL NO. 2165 OF 2022
                                                 WITH
                                   FIRST APPEAL NO. 2159 OF 2022
                                                  ...
                   ZILHA PARISHAD JALNA THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER AND ORS
                                               VERSUS
                                        DATTA KONDIBA PALWE
                                                  ...
                             Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Bhushan Kulkarni
                             AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. R.B. Dhaware
                            Advocate for Respondent 1 : Mr. A.H. Koralkar
                                                   …

                                    CORAM       : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                    Dated       : July 27, 2026

              PER COURT :-

              1.     Admit.

              2.     As the acquisition proceedings are of the year 2002, heard finally

              with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

              3.     By the present appeals, the appellant/Zilla Parishad is challenging

              the judgments and orders of the reference court in LAR Nos. 2510/2010

              dated 4.3.2014, 2594/2010 dated 5.3.2014, 135/2010 and 27/2010 dated

              3.10.2011 on the ground that the matters were decided exparte against

              the appellant.

              4.     It was brought to my notice that though the appellant/acquiring

              body/Zilla Parishad was served, the above LARs were proceeded exparte

              against it before the reference court. It needs to be noted that ultimately
                                                           FA 449/16 & Ors.
                                      2

the acquiring body needs to pay the compensation to the claimants.

Therefore, without going in to the merits of the matters, I deem it

appropriate to remand the matters back to the reference court to decide

the same afresh within a period of six weeks.

5.     In view of the above, the judgments and orders passed by the

reference court in LAR Nos. 2510/2010 dated 4.3.2014, 2594/2010 dated

5.3.2014, 135/2010 and 27/2010 dated 3.10.2011 are quashed and set

side. Consequently, the appeals filed by the original claimants for

enhancement are also disposed of accordingly.

6.     The amount, if any, deposited in this court be transmitted to the

reference court with interest accrued thereon.

7.     The reference court is directed to decide the above land acquisition

references within a period of six weeks.

8.     Parties to appear before the reference court on 10.8.2026.

9.     The learned counsel for the appellant undertakes that he will instruct

to Zilla Parishad to appear through the counsel before the reference court

on the above date.

10.    All points are kept open.

11.    The present appeals are disposed of accordingly.



                                           ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. )

ssc/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…