Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, legal representatives of the deceased claimant Shaliwan Raigonda Patil, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 1 January 2019 passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.12, Kolhapur, rejecting their application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The subject land, admeasuring 81-R in Gat No. 685 of Village Sangawade, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur, was acquired for the Dudhganga Canal Project. An award dated 21 October 1989 granted compensation of Rs.45,716/-. Dissatisfied, the claimant filed Writ Petition No. 2119 of 1989, which was dismissed on 20 February 1996. Possession was taken on 4 May 1997. The claimant died in 2017, and his legal representatives filed an application under Section 28A on 20 December 2018, seeking redetermination of compensation based on a higher award in a related reference. The Deputy Collector rejected the application solely on the ground that it was not accompanied by certified copies of the judgment/award. The High Court observed that the application was filed within the limitation period and that the requirement of certified copies is a procedural formality. The court held that the rejection on technical grounds was unsustainable and that the authority should have either considered the application on merits or granted an opportunity to rectify the defect. The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Deputy Collector for fresh consideration on merits, without raising the issue of limitation. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Redetermination of Compensation - Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Technical Rejection - The Deputy Collector rejected the application under Section 28A solely because it was not supported by certified copies of the judgment/award. The High Court held that such a technical rejection is not sustainable and that the authority should have considered the application on merits or granted an opportunity to rectify the defect. The court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. (Paras 1-8)
B) Land Acquisition - Limitation - Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The court noted that the application under Section 28A was filed within the prescribed period of three months from the date of the award in the reference, and the only objection was the lack of certified copies. The court directed the Deputy Collector to decide the application afresh without raising the issue of limitation. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 solely on the ground that it was not accompanied by certified copies of the judgment/award is legally sustainable.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 1 January 2019 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.12, Kolhapur for fresh consideration of the application under Section 28A on its own merits, without raising the issue of limitation. The Deputy Collector shall decide the application within three months from the date of receipt of the order. The writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Redetermination of compensation
- Certified copies
- Technical rejection
- Liberal interpretation
- Remand
Case Details
2025 LawText (BOM) (12) 228
Writ Petition No. 1315 of 2025
M. S. Karnik, Ajit B. Kadethankar
Mr. Sunil Kadam (thr. V.C.) for the Petitioner, Mrs. S. N. Deshmukh, AGP for the Respondent-State, Mr. D. D. Ranaware for the Respondent No. 3
Sunanda Shaliwan Patil, Shubhangi Dhipin Karav, Vijay Shaliwan Patil, Ajit Shaliwan Patil
State of Maharashtra, Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No. 12, Executive Engineer, Dudhganga Canal Division No.1
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the rejection of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for redetermination of compensation.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 1 January 2019 rejecting their application under Section 28A and a direction for fresh consideration on merits.
Filing Reason
The Deputy Collector rejected the application under Section 28A solely on the ground that it was not accompanied by certified copies of the judgment/award.
Previous Decisions
The original claimant's Writ Petition No. 2119 of 1989 challenging the award was dismissed on 20 February 1996. Possession was taken on 4 May 1997. No application under Section 18 was filed.
Issues
Whether the rejection of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 solely on the ground of lack of certified copies is legally sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the application under Section 28A was filed within limitation and the requirement of certified copies is procedural; the authority should have considered the application on merits or granted an opportunity to rectify the defect.
The respondents supported the impugned order, contending that the application was not accompanied by certified copies as required.
Ratio Decidendi
The rejection of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 solely on the ground that it was not accompanied by certified copies of the judgment/award is unsustainable. The authority should either consider the application on merits or grant an opportunity to rectify the defect. The provision for redetermination of compensation is beneficial and should be liberally construed.
Judgment Excerpts
The application under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 filed by original claimant Shaliwan Patil, has been turned down by the Respondent No.2 holding that the same was not supported with certified copies.
The rejection of the application on the ground that it was not accompanied by certified copies is not sustainable.
We, therefore, quash and set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) No.12, Kolhapur for fresh consideration of the application under Section 28A on its own merits.
Procedural History
The original claimant Shaliwan Raigonda Patil's land was acquired by award dated 21 October 1989. He filed Writ Petition No. 2119 of 1989 which was dismissed on 20 February 1996. Possession was taken on 4 May 1997. The claimant died in 2017. His legal representatives filed an application under Section 28A on 20 December 2018. The Deputy Collector rejected the application on 1 January 2019 for lack of certified copies. The petitioners filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date, which was disposed of on 1 December 2025.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 28A, 18
