Shah Rajesh Manibhai vs Competent Authority, National ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5254 Guj

        C/SCA/5913/2021                                ORDER




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

          R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5913 of 2021

==========================================================
                SHAH RAJESH MANIBHAI
                         Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA
         AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YV VAGHELA(2450) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR MAULIK NANAVATI for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO MS NIDHI VYAS, ASST.GOVERNMENT
PLEADER/PP(99) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 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, Ms. Nidhi Vyas, waives for the respondent-

State. 1.

1 This petition is preferred by the petitioners, who

are agriculturists 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 Express Highway.

     C/SCA/5913/2021                                                  ORDER




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 petitioners have 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 petitioners 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

Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation

C/SCA/5913/2021 ORDER

and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to

as, 'the Act of 2013').

2.3 According to the petitioners, 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

petitioners 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

petitioners, since, their lands are not situated

within any urban or the cantonment area and

since, it is situated in rural area, the Factor-2

needs to be applied for the purpose of calculation of

C/SCA/5913/2021 ORDER

compensation qua the petitioners. 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) ..."

     C/SCA/5913/2021                                  ORDER



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

for the petitioners, 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

10.11.2016 of multiplier Factor has been declared

C/SCA/5913/2021 ORDER

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, Ms. Vyas, 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,

Ms. Mehta, does not insist on this Court

determining anything in this matter on merits, by

C/SCA/5913/2021 ORDER

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

petitioners 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

Court in all respects. We reiterate that while so

doing, it shall BEAR IN MIND the decision of the

C/SCA/5913/2021 ORDER

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