Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, landowners from Beed district, filed a writ petition after their lands were taken into possession in 1996 for a village tank project, but acquisition proceedings were not completed and compensation was not paid for nearly three decades -- The High Court treated this as a test case highlighting systemic failures in land acquisition matters, where authorities neglect statutory duties, causing hardship to landowners and financial burden due to accrued interest and escalated compensation -- The Court directed the respondents to complete the acquisition process, determine compensation under the RFCTLARR Act, and pay it with interest within six months -- Additionally, the Chief Secretary was instructed to examine the delay, fix responsibility, and ensure accountability to prevent recurrence -- The judgment underscored the constitutional mandate under Article 300A and the state's absolute obligation to pay compensation once land is taken
Headnote
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Writ Petition, addressed a case where petitioners' lands were taken into possession in 1996 for construction of a village tank, but acquisition proceedings were not completed and compensation was not paid -- The Court held that such delay constituted a systemic failure by state authorities, violating statutory and constitutional obligations under Article 300A of the Constitution -- The Court directed the respondents to complete the acquisition process, determine compensation under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act), and pay it with applicable interest within six months -- The Court also mandated the Chief Secretary to conduct an administrative examination to fix responsibility for the delay and take corrective action -- The judgment emphasized that state inaction cannot be a defence, and prolonged dereliction of duty results in injustice to landowners and avoidable financial burden on the public exchequer
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: The Issue of Consideration was the failure of state authorities to complete land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation for lands taken into possession nearly three decades earlier, despite the project being completed and the land being utilized for public purpose
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case issues
Final Decision
The Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to complete the land acquisition process, determine compensation under the RFCTLARR Act, and pay it with applicable interest within six months -- The Chief Secretary was instructed to conduct an administrative examination to fix responsibility for the delay and take corrective action
2026 LawText (BOM) (02) 99
Writ Petition No. 13381 of 2025
Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi J. , Hiten S. Venegavkar J.
Mr. Tushar Shinde h/f Mr. C. H. Shinde, Mr. S. B. Narwade
Shahadeo s/o Dagadu Mete, Ananda s/o Dagadu Mete, Mahadeo s/o Dagadu Mete, Kamalbai Raghunath Kharade, Namabai Shamrao Kharade
The State of Maharashtra, The Divisional Commissioner, Chh. Sambhajinagar Division, The District Collector, Beed, The Deputy Collector, (E.G.S.), Beed, The Sub-Divisional Officer, Patoda, The Executive Engineer, Beed Irrigation Division, The Sub-Divisional Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Sub Division, Patoda
Premium Content
The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case indexes
Nature of Litigation: Writ petition filed by landowners seeking enforcement of statutory and constitutional obligations for completion of land acquisition proceedings and payment of compensation
Remedy Sought
Petitioners asked the court to direct the respondents to complete the acquisition process and pay compensation for lands taken in 1996
Filing Reason
Authorities failed to complete land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation for nearly three decades after taking possession of the lands
Previous Decisions
No prior decisions mentioned; the case was treated as a test case highlighting systemic issues in land acquisition matters
Issues
Whether the state authorities' failure to complete land acquisition proceedings and pay compensation for lands taken in 1996 violates statutory and constitutional obligations
What remedies are available to the petitioners for the delay and inaction by the authorities
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that possession was taken in 1996, the project was completed, but acquisition proceedings were not finalized and compensation was not paid, causing hardship -- Respondents' arguments not detailed in the judgment, but the Court noted state inaction as a defence is impermissible
Ratio Decidendi
Article 300A of the Constitution mandates that deprivation of property must be by authority of law, which includes timely determination and payment of compensation -- State authorities have an absolute obligation to discharge statutory duties in land acquisition matters, and prolonged delay constitutes a systemic failure violating constitutional and statutory rights -- The Court can issue writs of mandamus under Article 226 to enforce these obligations and prevent injustice to landowners
Judgment Excerpts
This writ petition discloses a most disturbing state of affairs and reflects a continuing failure on the part of the respondent authorities to discharge their statutory and constitutional obligations in matters of land acquisition -- The Court is constrained to observe that the State cannot be permitted to plead its own inaction, inefficiency or inter-departmental delays as a defence -- Article 300A of the Constitution mandates that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law
Procedural History
Petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 13381 of 2025 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, after lands were taken into possession in 1996 without completion of acquisition proceedings or payment of compensation -- The Court heard arguments and delivered the judgment addressing the systemic issues and granting relief
Premium Content
The Indexes are only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now
to access critical case indexes
