Bombay High Court
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORSversusMARUTI MAHADA DOKE
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The enhancement does not exceed the four‑times limit, so the appeals are dismissed.
Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed a judgment and award dated 10 April 2007 passed by the Additional District Judge‑I, Beed, in several land acquisition cases, alleging that the reference court's enhancement of compensation was improper. The reference court had increased the compensation but did not exceed four times the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The State relied on Government Resolution No. Sankirna‑2014/Prak.Kra.4/Bham‑1/A‑4 dated 3 November 2016, as amended, which stipulated that the State would not challenge a reference if the enhancement was up to four times. The High Court examined whether the enhancement breached this policy limit. Finding that the enhancement stayed within the four‑times ceiling, the Court saw no reason to intervene and dismissed the appeals, also disposing of any pending civil applications.
Issues considered
- Whether the compensation enhanced by the reference court exceeds the four‑times limit prescribed by the Government Resolution and therefore warrants judicial intervention
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation enhancement
- government resolution
- reference court
- appeal dismissed
- High Court
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:46239
FA 2582/13 & Ors.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
924 FIRST APPEAL NO. 2582 OF 2013
THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS
VERSUS
MARUTI MAHADA DOKE
...
AGP for Appellants/State : Mr. S.N. Morampalle
...
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2583 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2584 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2585 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2586 OF 2013
WITH
FIRST APPEAL NO. 2587 OF 2013
…
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
Dated : September 30, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned AGP for State/appellants.
2. By these appeal, the appellants/State assails the Judgment and
award dated 10.4.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-I,
Beed in LAR Nos. No.176/2005, 174/2005, 175/2005, 173/2005, 191/2005
and 179/2005.
3. The learned AGP submits that the compensation enhanced by the
learned Reference Court does not exceed four times the amount awarded by
the Land Acquisition Officer.
4. 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
FA 2582/13 & Ors.
2
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
order. 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. )
ssc/
Checking your session…