PRATAP BHOGILAL ADULT, INDIAN INHABITANT RESIDING AT 26, B.G. KHER MARG, MALABAR HILL, MUMBAI Vs. CITY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION A STATUTORY CORPORATION
LAWS(BOM)-2017-4-263
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on April 04,2017

Pratap Bhogilal Adult, Indian Inhabitant Residing At 26, B.G. Kher Marg, Malabar Hill, Mumbai Appellant
VERSUS
City Industrial Development Corporation A Statutory Corporation Respondents

JUDGEMENT

G.S.Kulkarni, J. - (1.) The challenge in the present petition is to the communication dated 21 March 2013 of the 1st respondent whereby claim of the petitioners for allotment of a developed plot of land under 12.5% scheme has been rejected. The petitioners have also prayed that the respondents be directed to grant the petitioners benefit of the 12.5% scheme.
(2.) Respondent no.1 under the directions of the State Government was implementing a scheme popularly known as 12.5 % scheme whereby those persons whose agricultural lands were acquired for the "New Bombay Project' and who had become landless were granted 12.5% developed plots in addition to the land acquisition compensation paid to them.
(3.) The petitioners' claim to be the heirs and representatives of one Bhogilal Leharchand, who, the petitioners have averred was the owner of 61 acres of land situated at Village Vashi, District Thane. These lands were acquired by the Government of Maharashtra under the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (for short '1894 Act'), for the New Bombay project. As regards the said land acquisition a notification under Section 4 of 1894 Act came to be issued on 3 February 1970. A notification under Section 6 of 1894 Act was issued on 14 May 1971 and thereafter an award came to be declared under Section 11 of the 1894 Act on 20 November 1972. It is stated that the land was divided into two parcels and there were two separate awards. The petitioners' father being aggrieved by the award, had preferred references under Section 18 of 1894 Act. There was also a reference for apportionment of compensation under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act as there were several claimants who made a claim in the compensation. A reference as preferred by the petitioners' father for enhancement of compensation was allowed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.