Dhruv Dineshbhai Patel vs The Competent Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 5250 Guj

         C/SCA/6224/2021                                     ORDER




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6224 of 2021

==========================================================
                            DHRUV DINESHBHAI PATEL
                                    Versus
                           THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YV VAGHELA(2450) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3
MR MAULIK NANAVATI for NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the Respondent(s)
No. 2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
       and
       HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                                Date : 23/04/2021

                         ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI)

Rule. Learned Advocate, Mr. Nanavati, waives

service of rule for Respondent No.1 and the learned

AGP, Mr. Krutik Parikh, waives for the respondent-

State. 1.

1 This petition is preferred by the petitioner, who is

an agriculturist and is holding the land, within the

prescribed ceiling limit, situated within the limits of

villages Sama, Dodka and Bhayali, which have

been acquired for the purpose of Vadodara-Mumbai

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

Express Highway.

2 The land of the petitioners, admeasuring 4958

sq.mts., bearing Survey No. 331, which is situated

within the limit of Village: Dodka, Taluka:

Vadodara Rural, District, Vadodara, has been

acquired by Respondent No.2 vide notification,

Dated: 05.09.2017, bearing No. L.A.Q./Vadodara-

Mumbai Express Way/Dodka Compensation Case

No. 7 of 2013.

2.1 The petitioner has approached this Court, in wake

of the decision of the Apex Court, rendered in SLP

(Civil) Diary No. 18777 of 2020, which came to be

disposed of on 07.01.2021.

2.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the circular of

the Sate Government, Dated: 10.11.2016, which

declares that the same is falling within the limits of

Urban Development Authority and it is to be

treated as the urban area for applying the

multiplier factor to the market value of the land, as

provided under the Right to Fair Compensation and

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation

and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to

as, 'the Act of 2013').

2.3 According to the petitioner, the Circular dated

10.11.2016 has been quashed and set aside by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order, dated:

12.09.2019, passed in Special Civil Application No.

8734 of 2019.

2.4 The SLP preferred by the State Government before

the Apex Court, being SLP (Civil) Diary No. 18777

of 2020, has already been dismissed on

07.01.2021. He has, therefore, approached this

Court with a request that the land of the petitioner

is situated in the area, which would require

application of multiplier Factor-2, instead of

Factor-1, as has been done by the competent

authority, for the purpose of calculation of the

amount of compensation. According to the

petitioner, since, his land is not situated within any

urban or the cantonment area and since, it is

situated in rural area, the Factor-2 needs to be

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

applied for the purpose of calculation of

compensation qua the petitioner. They, therefore,

are before this Court, seeking following prayers:

"9. ... (A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ or mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction and thereby be pleased to direct the respondent number 1 to amend/modify/revise the award dated 05-09-2017 bearing No. LAQ.VadodaraMumbai Express Way/Dodka Compensation CASE No. 07/2013 and re-compute the compensation qua the lands of the petitioners by multiplying the market value as determined under Section 26(1) of the LARR, 2013, Act with a Factor of 2 (two) and applying all other statutory benefits as provided under the LARR Act), 2013 including solatium under S.30(1), interest under S.30(3) and be further pleased to direct he respondents to pay the same, with interest from 05/09/2017 @ 9% for the first year and 15% per annum for subsequent years till date of realisation within 6 week of the judgment;

(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to

16:09:00 IST 2021C/SCA/5571/2021 JUDGMENT respondents from using, altering, making any construction of any kind on the land of the petitioners;

     C/SCA/6224/2021                                      ORDER



                      (C) ..."

3    We have heard the learned Advocate, Mr. Vaghela,

for the petitioner, who has argued along the line of

the memo of the petition. He has urged that the

term 'Rural Area' has been defined by this Court

vide its judgment and order passed in SCA No.

7458 of 2019, and therefore, the Factor-2 shall

need to be applied for the purpose of calculation of

the amount of compensation in case of the lands,

which are situated in the rural area. Therefore, the

re-calculation shall need to be done, by applying

multiplier Factor-2 to arrive at the market value, as

provided under Section 26(1) of the Act of 2013.

4 Learned Advocate, Mr. Nanavati, appearing for and

on behalf of Respondent No.2 has urged that the

determination of the amount of compensation shall

need to be exclusively done by the competent

authority. According to him, there is no objection,

if, the suitable directions are issued to the

competent authority to re-compute the

compensation, since, application of circular of

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

10.11.2016 of multiplier Factor has been declared

bad in law. So far as the land situated within the

rural areas is concerned, instead of the Court

applying multiplier Factor-2 by treating the land to

be situated within the rural area, the same should

be left to the competent authority, which can

always, on the strength of the geographical

location, as on the date of the issuance of the

notification under Section 3A of the Act of 1956

shall be applying the multiplier factor and

recomputing the compensation.

5 Learned AGP, Mr. Krutik Parikh, has urged this

Court that whatever, that is needed to be done,

shall be done, as has been directed by this Court in

SCA No. 8734 of 20119 and confirmed by the Apex

Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 18777 of 2020. She

has urged that the authority concerned can be

trusted for the purpose of re-computation of the

compensation.

6 Learned Advocate, Mr. Vaghela, after hearing the

learned Advocate, Mr. Nanavati, and learned AGP,

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

Mr. Krutik Parikh, does not insist on this Court

determining anything in this matter on merits, by

modifying and applying multiplication Factor-2 qua

the land of the petitioner. He is agreeable to the

matter being referred to the competent authority

for recomputing, by applying appropriate multiplier

factor, within some stipulated time period.

7 Having, thus, heard, learned Advocates on both the

sides and considering the rival submissions so also

noticing the agreement on the part of the petitioner

for this matter being referred to the competent

authority for re-computation of the compensation,

without dealing with the submissions of exclusivity

of competent authority for determination of

compensation and keeping the same open, to be

decided in an appropriate matter, we deem it

appropriate to DIRECT the competent authority to

re-compute the market value of the land of the

petitioners herein, by applying the appropriate

multiplication factor for the amount of

compensation and follow the dictum of the Apex

C/SCA/6224/2021 ORDER

Court in all respects. We reiterate that while so

doing, it shall BEAR IN MIND the decision of the

Apex Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 18777 of 2020

so also the decision of this Court in SCA No. 8734

of 2019 and publish the corrected award under

Section 3-G(1) of the Act.

7.1 This shall be done within the period of EIGHT

WEEKS, from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order.

(MS. SONIA GOKANI, J. )

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) Pallavi/sudhir