Bombay High Court
SANDIP JANARDAN GHOGREversusTHE STATE OF OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. ITS ADDL CHIEF SEC PUBLIC WORKS DEPT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court directed the SLAO to disburse the compensation amount to the petitioner within one week.
Summary
Petitioner Sandip Janardan Ghogre filed a writ petition seeking direct disbursement of compensation amount that had been deposited with the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) of Raigad. The petitioner argued that there was no dispute over the amount and that the High Court should direct the SLAO to pay the compensation directly, rather than routing it through the executing court. The respondents' affidavit confirmed the deposit of the compensation with the SLAO. The Court agreed with the petitioner’s request and ordered the SLAO to disburse the amount within one week, with the petitioner undertaking to withdraw the execution proceeding upon receipt. All pending applications were also disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can direct the Special Land Acquisition Officer to directly disburse compensation deposited with it, bypassing the executing court
Subjects
- compensation
- land acquisition
- writ petition
- direct disbursement
- execution proceedings
- High Court
- Article 226
Judgment
34_WP_10930_26.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10930 OF 2026
Sandip Janardan Ghogre … Petitioner
vs.
State of Maharashtra, Thr. Addl. Chief Secretary,
Public Works Department and others … Respondents
Mr. Sachin S. Punde for petitioner.
Ms. Pooja M. Joshi-Deshpande, AGP for all respondents – State authorities.
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ
DATE : 09th OCTOBER, 2026
P.C. :
. The affidavit-in-reply tendered by the learned AGP on behalf of
respondent Nos.6 – Collector, Raigad and respondent No.7 – Special
Land Acquisition Officer, Raigad (SLAO), is taken on record. The
contents of the same indicate that the amount of compensation
payable to the petitioner is deposited with respondent No.7 – SLAO.
2. In that light, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
instead of the said amount being deposited with the
executing/reference Court for disbursal to the petitioner, this Court
may consider issuing directions to the said respondent to directly
disburse the same to the petitioner. It is stated that there is no
dispute regarding apportionment of the said compensation amount.
3. Hence, we are inclined to issue the direction, as prayed for by
the petitioner.
Digitally
signed by
PRIYA PRIYA
Date:
KAMBLI
KAMBLI 2026.10.09
17:58:50
+0530
1/2
34_WP_10930_26.doc
4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of by
directing respondent No.7 – SLAO to disburse the compensation
amount to the petitioner within one week from today. The petitioner
undertakes to withdraw the execution proceeding, upon the amount
being received.
5. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
Priya Kambli
2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.