Maruti Shivram Jaykar And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru Prin. ...

ik-46771638 Bombay High Court 24 December 2025 • WRIT PETITION NO. 8296 OF 2023; WRIT PETITION NO. 10143 OF 2023; WRIT PETITION NO. 13025 OF 2023; WRIT PETITION NO. 16778 OF 2023; WRIT PETITION NO. 16779 OF 2023; Writ Petition No. 10143 of 2023; Writ Petition No. 10143; Writ Petition No. 10143; Writ Petition No. 8296 of 2023; Writ Petition No. 13025 of 2023; Writ Petition No. 10143 • 49 min read

Judges (2)

Aarti Sathe Coram G.S. Kulkarni Delivered

Counsel (10)

Birendra Saraf Counsel Respondent Darshna Kamble Counsel Petitioner Eknath Dhokale Counsel Petitioner Gaurav Potnis Counsel Petitioner M.S. Bane Counsel Respondent Payal Patil Counsel Petitioner Rakesh Singh Counsel Respondent Sachit Bhogle Counsel Respondent Vijay Patil Counsel Respondent Yogesh Patil Counsel Respondent

Parties (7)

Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation Respondent State of Maharashtra Respondent Govind Poslya Gavit Petitioner Kamlakar Raghunath Ahirrao Petitioner Maruti Shivram Jaykar Petitioner Santosh Ramchandra Balkawade Petitioner Yogesh Kamlakar Mangle Petitioner

Case Significance

Maruti Shivram Jaykar And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru Prin. ... is a Bombay High Court decision dated December 24, 2025 (citation: ik-46771638). Five connected writ petitions challenged an MSRDC circular that fixed land acquisition compensation using a formula that did not comply with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The Division Bench quashed the impugned circular, holding that Section 11 of the 2013 Act must be properly applied for compensation determination. Pending challenges to awards passed under the circular were kept open for the parties to raise contentions based on this order.</p The bench comprised Justices Aarti Sathe and G.S. Kulkarni. The judgment was delivered by Justice G.S. Kulkarni.

Summary

Five connected writ petitions challenged an MSRDC circular that fixed land acquisition compensation using a formula that did not comply with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The Division Bench quashed the impugned circular, holding that Section 11 of the 2013 Act must be properly applied for compensation determination. Pending challenges to awards passed under the circular were kept open for the parties to raise contentions based on this order.

What was the outcome of Maruti Shivram Jaykar And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru Prin. ...?

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-46771638)