Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955—Section 19C(4)—Apportionment dispute in compensation for acquired land—LAO had no authority to decide—Matter to be referred to Principal Civil Court—Impugned order quashed.

Constitution of India, 1950—Article 226—Writ Petition filed challenging the order of LAO apportioning compensation for acquired land under the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955.

Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955—Section 19C(4)—LAO determined compensation amount but also decided its apportionment among partners of a firm—Such apportionment disputes fall within the jurisdiction of the Principal Civil Court—Held, LAO acted without jurisdiction—Impugned order quashed and matter referred to Civil Court (Para 39, 52).

Held:
Impugned order dated 11 March 2024, to the extent it apportioned compensation and directed disbursal to individual partners, was quashed and set aside. LAO directed to refer the dispute to the Competent District Court, Pune within two months (Para 53). Compensation amount to be transferred to the Civil Court and invested in an interest-bearing account until final adjudication (Para 54).

Ratio Decidendi:
a) Compensation determination and apportionment are distinct processes—Apportionment disputes must be resolved by the Principal Civil Court and not by the LAO (Para 36, 37).
b) Failure of LAO to refer dispute to Civil Court contravenes statutory provisions and Supreme Court precedents (Para 38, 40).
c) Balance sheets and conveyance deeds indicated firm ownership—Inter-se partner disputes must be resolved judicially (Para 44-46).

Subjects:
Writ Petition—Compensation Apportionment—Jurisdiction—Principal Civil Court—Maharashtra Highways Act—Land Acquisition Officer—Ultra Vires—Interim Relief—Firm Partners’ Dispute