Bombay High Court
EX. ENGINEER, IRRIGATION PROJECT STRENGTHENING DIV. OMERGA AND ORSversusNANASAHEB DYANDEV JATKAR
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appeal is dismissed as the matter has already been decided in the earlier order.
Summary
The Executive Engineer (acquiring body) appealed a 2015 award concerning compensation for land acquisition, arguing that the award should be set at Rs.6,000 per R for irrigated land. The respondent cited a later order (28 July 2026) in a group of first appeals (First Appeal No. 2948 of 2017) which had already fixed compensation at Rs.6,000 per R for irrigated land and Rs.3,000 per R for dry land, covering the present case. The appellant’s counsel reviewed the cited order and agreed that the present appeal was subsumed by it. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, directing that any balance amount be paid with interest as per the Full Bench judgment in State of Maharashtra v. Kailash Shiva Rangari (2016). The court also noted that any excess amount after disbursement could be reclaimed by the acquiring body.
Issues considered
- Whether the present first appeal is maintainable given the earlier order in the same land acquisition proceedings.
- Whether the compensation rate of Rs.6,000 per R for irrigated land applies to the subject land.
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- interest
- precedent
- appeal dismissed
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:43923
935-FA-496-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
FIRST APPEAL NO. 496 OF 2023
Executive Engineer,
Irrigation Project Strengthening Division,
Omerga and Others ..APPELLANTS
VERSUS
Nanasaheb Dyandev Jatkar ..RESPONDENT
....
Ms. S.D. Shelke, Advocate for appellants
Mr. R.V. Naiknavare, Advocate for respondent
....
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 02 nd May, 2015
passed by the learned 2nd C.J.S.D., Osmanabad in L.A.R. No. 52 of 2013, the
acquiring body has preferred this first appeal.
2. When the matter is called out, Mr. Naiknavare, learned counsel for
the respondent placed on record order dated 28 th July, 2026 passed by this
Court in a group of first appeals with cross-objections led by First Appeal No.
2948 of 2017. He would submit that the cited matters arise out of the same
land acquisition proceedings which is the subject matter of present first
appeal. He would also submit that in the said matters, after considering all
the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court pleased to fix the rate of
compensation at Rs.6,000/- per R for irrigated land and Rs.3,000/- per R for
1 / 2
935-FA-496-23.odt
dry land. He would further submit that the subject matter land is already
categorised as irrigated land and hence claimants are entitled for
compensation @ Rs.6,000/- per R applicable to the irrigated land. He submit
that in view of this, nothing survives in this first appeal.
3. Ms. Shelke, learned counsel for the appellants was given an
opportunity to go through the said order cited by learned counsel for the
respondent. After going through the same, she agrees that the present appeal
is covered by the cited order.
4. In view of above, present first appeal stands dismissed. Suffice to
note, interest part shall be covered by the law laid down by the Full Bench
judgment of this Court in case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva
Rangari, 2016 (3) Mh.L.J. 457. Any security, if offered by the
claimant/respondent while withdrawing the amount from this Court, stands
discharged. The claimant/respondent is permitted to withdraw the balance
amount pending in this Court. However, as observed above, the balance
amount shall be disbursed after applying the interest as per Kailash Shiva
Rangari’s (supra) case. After disbursement of amount to the
claimant/respondent, if any excess amount is found, the acquiring body is
entitled to withdraw the same.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J. )
SSD
2 / 2
Checking your session…