1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6839 OF 2008
1. Shri Yashwant Savlaram Naik
2. Mangesh Yashwant Naik
At Post Karve Post Nerul
Tal. & Dist. Thane .. Petitioners
Versus
1. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Thane
2. The Collector of Thane District,
3. The State of Maharashtra
Through the Chief Secretary,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 .. Respondents
Shri Rahul Thakur for the the petitioners
Shri V. S. Gokhale, AGP for respondent -State
CORAM: J. N. PATEL &
MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATED: 30th July, 2009
J U D G E M E N T (Per Mridula Bhatkar, J.)
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of the learned
counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have filed this petition challenging the refusal to
issue certificate of Project Affected Persons by the Respondent No.1 under
the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999( By
amendment repealing the Act of 1986, see Section 28 of the said Act).
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::
2
3. Survey No. 275, Gut No. 273 and 274 situate at Village Darve
was the ancestral property of the petitioners. The State has acquired said
land of the petitioners for the Township of Navi Mumbai Project in the
year 1986 by passing award in the Unit Case No.59, Award No. 179. Shri
Savalaram Chandar Naik- father of petitioner No.1 and grandfather of
Petitioner No.2 was then in possession and was cultivating the said land.
Savalaram Chandar Naik, and his son- Petitioner No.1 are “affected
person” as defined under Section 2 of the Act and entitled to the
rehabilitation and the other benefits provided under the provisions of the
said Act. Inter alia, the certificate as project affected person was issued to
the petitioner No.1 on 4.3.1987. However, the petitioner No.1 was not
educated and he was not found suitable and could not avail of benefit
under any scheme or for employment available under the Government
Scheme for project affected persons. However, his son- Petitioner No.2 who
is educated, is entitled to get the PAP Certificate and so he has applied to
the respondents for the same by letter dated 30.1.2006. The Respondent No.
1, demanded certain documents and the petitioner made compliance by
producing necessary document and NOC of all legal representatives and
award holder for grant of certificate in favour of Petitioner No.2 on
18.07.2006. The respondents, by letter dated 2.8.2007 communicated refusal to
issue such certificate in favour of Petitioner No. 2 on the ground that the
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::
3
original Award holder – Savalaram Chandar Naik was dead on 19.6.2007,
when the petitioner No. 2 applied for the PAP Certificate. Hence, being
aggrieved with the said letter of refusal to grant PAP certificate, the
petitioners have filed the petition.
4. The Respondents have filed affidavit in reply opposing the
application. The fact of acquisition of land from Savalaram Naik and his
status as original award holder is admitted by the respondents. Learned
Counsel appearing for the Respondent- State has placed reliance on the GR
dated 14th September, 1998 under which, if the person in whose name the
award is declared, is directly dependent on the person who has applied for
the PAP certificate is only entitled to receive PAP certificate and in the
given case, Savalaram Chandra being deceased, is not dependent on his
grand son -Petitioner No.2 and hence, there is no question to issue PAP
certificate to his grandson i.e. Petitioner No.2.
5. By this GR, the grandson or daughter-in-law are entitled to get
PAP certificate, if they are living in joint family and project affected
person is dependent on grandson or daughter in law. The Bill No. XXVII
of 1999 in respect of this enactment was introduced with a view to
consolidate and amend the law relating to rehabilitation of persons affected
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::
4
by certain projects under the State of Maharashtra. It is a beneficial
legislation in which the State takes responsibility to resettle the persons
who are affected by the act of the State. On account of lengthy and
cumbersome procedure laid down in the Act and also the rising
expectations of project affected persons, timely settlement of the displaced
persons due to various projects in the State Could not be achieved and,
therefore, the Government, on 21st October, 1995 appointed a Committee,
which submitted the report in November, 1995 and after considering the
recommendation of the Committee, the law relating to the rehabilitation of
the project affected person was amended by laying down adequate, simple,
effective and speedy procedure for rehabilitation of the persons affected by
projects.
6. The GR dated 14th September, 1998, therefore, needs to be read
taking into consideration the statement of objects and reasons of the said
Act, 1999 which clearly speaks out that it is a welfare legislation. The
purpose of the scheme is to give economical support not only to the
original award holder but also extend to the family which consists of
grandson or daughter-in-law as they are also included under the GR as
person entitled to obtain PAP Certificate. Dependency of the original award
holder is the condition precedent for such entitlement. The GR further
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::
5
restricts the number of such entitled family members to only one. In the
other words, only one member falling in the category of the relatives
mentioned in the GR can get the certificate. The, fruits of the scheme, if
not timely given, then the purpose of the scheme itself is defeated. By
acquisition of land, livelihood of the person is taken away. So, his son or
grandson and the family suffers. The said GR dated 14th September, 1998 is
to be interpreted by adopting beneficent rule of construction. If the
Original award holder was dependent during his life time on the grandson,
then even after the death of the original award holder, that past
dependency is to be considered and makes the grand son entitled to PAP
certificate. Thus, the dependency may exist before making application for
the said certificate and grandson is to be considered as entitled under the
GR to get the PAP Certificate. Such a construction is only likely to assist
the achievement of the policy of the Act, 1999. What contemplates
rehabilitation and resettlement of the person ( inclusive of the family
members) the benefit to which a person ( or his family) is entitled on being
uprooted and affected by virtue of acquisition of his land cannot become
extinct on his/her death unless it is availed by him or his family. The G.
R. rather takes into contemplation all such contingencies and enables
the person or any member of his family to receive the benefits. The G. R.
only extend the list of beneficiaries to the relatives mentioned therein
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::
6
and it will be erroneous to interpret it as sought to be explained in the
affidavit in reply of the respondents.
7. The Petition is therefore required to be allowed in terms of
prayer Clause (b).
“Prayer Clause (b) : This Honourable Court may be pleased to
issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ,
order, direction, in the nature of mandamus, directing RespondentNos. 1 and 2 herein to issue/grant a ‘Project Affected Person
Certificate’ to Petitioner No.2 within a period of 15 days from
today”
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (J. N. PATEL, J.)
jpc/-
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 14:50:49 :::