Bombay High Court
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusLAXMAN MANIRAM AHER AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appeals are dismissed as the compensation awarded is within the four‑times limit and there is no ground for intervention.
Summary
The Municipal Commissioner of Nanded Waghela City Municipal Corporation filed a series of first appeals challenging compensation awards granted by a reference court in favor of various respondents. The State Government, through a resolution and its corrigenda, had declared that it would not contest the reference court's orders if the compensation was enhanced only up to four times the amount awarded by the State Level Appellate Officer (SLAO). The learned Advocate General argued that the compensation awarded was within this four‑fold limit. The High Court examined the government resolution and found no basis to interfere with the reference court's orders. Consequently, the Court dismissed all the appeals and ordered the disposal of any pending civil applications related to the matters.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation awarded by the reference court exceeds the four‑times limit prescribed by the State Government resolution and therefore can be challenged.
- Whether the State Government's resolution bars judicial intervention when compensation is enhanced up to four times the SLAO award.
Subjects
- compensation
- municipal corporation
- reference court
- government resolution
- appeal dismissed
- civil applications disposed
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:26607
1 of 5 14-FA.1836.2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
14 FIRST APPEAL NO. 1836 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
SHANKAR GANGADHARRAO SINGEWAR AND OTHERS
...
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
...
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2517 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
MANORAMABAI VASANTRAO KHEDKAR AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2521 OF 2013
NANDED WAGHALA CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, NANDED
VERSUS
ABDUL MUBIN ABDUL RASHID AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2526 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
RATANSINGH AMARSINGH BASIWALE AND OTHERS
2 of 5 14-FA.1836.2013
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Amit A. Mukhedkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2520 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
SHARADCHANDRA BHALCHANDRA SHAHU AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2515 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
MOHANSING RATANSINGH LANGRI AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2519 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
ONKAR RATAN CHAVAN AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2524 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
3 of 5 14-FA.1836.2013
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
KUSUMBAI PADMAKAR SHINGEWAR AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2522 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
SY. KHAJA SALIM PASHA AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Shaikh Mazhar A. Jahagirdar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and
2.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2523 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
LAXMAN MANIRAM AHER AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2518 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
HASHAM ALI RAMZAN ALI AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
4 of 5 14-FA.1836.2013
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2525 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
NANAK KAUR DHARAMSINGH SANDHU AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
AND
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2516 OF 2013
THE MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, NANDED WAGHALA CITY
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
VERSUS
SUDHAKAR GANGADHARRAO SINGEWAR AND OTHERS
…
Mr. R. K. Ingole, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr. R. B. Dhaware, AGP for Respondent-State.
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 2nd JULY, 2026
P.C.:-
1. Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.
2. The appearance of Mr. Mrigesh D. Narwadkar, learned
Advocate, stands discharged. Mr. Ingole, learned Advocate, appears for
the Appellant.
3. Learned AGP submits that the compensation granted by the
learned Reference Court is within four times the compensation granted
5 of 5 14-FA.1836.2013
by the SLAO.
4. In fact the State Government vide 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.
5. Therefore, I do not find any reason to intervene with the
impugned orders. Hence, the present Appeals are dismissed.
6. In view of dismissal of the Appeals, pending Civil
Applications, if any, do not survive and are disposed of accordingly.
(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.)
Tauseef
Checking your session…