TIPNIS,J. - (1.) THIS petition challenges the acquisition of petitioner's land which acquisition was for the purpose of resettlement of displaced persons due to warna project.
(2.) WE have heard Shri Datar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sonawane, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State. Shri Datar contended that the procedure as prescribed under section 13 of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 is not followed and therefore the entire acquisition proceedings are vitiated. However, the learned counsel fairly did not press this point in view of the fact that the said challenge has been already adjudicated upon by this court and has been negatived. Shri Datar then contended that the award is vitiated as it is against the provisions of Section 11-A of the Land Acquisition Act. Shri Datar contended that section 4 notification in the matter was issued on 1.9.1983. Section 6 notification was published in the Official Gazette on 14.11.1985 whereas the award was passed on 7.3.1988 and as such, clearly beyond the period of two years of the date of the publication of the declaration. Shri Datar also in this behalf brought to our notice the decision of this court rendered on 30th October 1996 in writ petition no. 4778 of 1988 and contended that the petition should succeed on this point in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case.
(3.) THE Apex Court in its decision reported in (1995)2 Supreme Court Cases 497 -Krishi Utpadak Mandi Samiti and anr vs. Makrand Singh and ors. had discussed the question regarding the proper interpretation of Section 6 of the Land Acquisition and has held that the words 'being hereafter referred to' as appearing in the said section, has a reference to making of the award under section 11 as well as to the determination of the market value prevailing as on the last of the dates and the award should be made within the period prescribed by section 11A of the said Act. It is further observed that the limitation prescribed under section 11-A is for the purpose of making the award and if the Collector fails to do so, the entire proceeds under section 4(1) and 6(1) shall stand lapsed. The Apex Court further observed that the publication in the Official Gazette already made under clause (1) of proviso to sub section (1) of section 6 is complete as soon as the declaration under section 6(1) was published in the Official Gazette. That will be the date for the purpose of computation of three years period from last of the dates of the publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the Act. The procedural and ministerial acts prescribed under section (2) are only for the purpose of the procedure to be followed 'hereinafter', in other words, the steps to be taken subsequent to the publication of the declaration under section 6(1) of the Act.;