Patel Dahyabhai Vallabhdas vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 7824 Guj

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 7824 Guj
Judgement Date : 6 July, 2021

Gujarat High Court

Patel Dahyabhai Vallabhdas vs State Of Gujarat on 6 July, 2021

Bench: Biren Vaishnav

      C/SCA/6458/2021                              ORDER DATED: 06/07/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6458 of 2021

==========================================================
                        PATEL DAHYABHAI VALLABHDAS
                                   Versus
                             STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:

MR AV PRAJAPATI(672) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
 for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MS. SHRUTI PATHAK, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for
the Respondent(s) No. 1

==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
          VIKRAM NATH

             And

             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                              Date : 06/07/2021

                               ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV)

1 In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the

prayer reads as under:

"7(A)Your Lordships may be pleased to held that the present Petitioner is covered by the Judgment and Order of this Hon'ble Court dated 19.03.2019 passed in Special Civil Application No. 14335 of 2014 and other allied matters as the present Petitioner is the original Claimant in the Land Acquisition Case No. 2 of 2009 dated 14.08.2013, which was challenged and subject matter of the above referred petitions and thereby be pleased to issue similar directions to the Respondents herein as issued in para 10 of the above referred Judgment and Order dated 19.03.2019 passed in Special Civil Application No. 14335 of 2014 and other allied

C/SCA/6458/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2021

matters."

2 The case of the petitioners is that their lands were also acquired by

the same notifications and for the purpose which was the subject matter

of Special Civil Application No. 14335 of 2019 and allied matters

decided by a Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 19.03.2019.

Hence, the relief as prayed for quoted above.

3 Heard Shri A.V.Prajapati, learned counsel for the petitioners and

Ms.Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State-

respondent. Mr.Prajapati, learned counsel, states that he does not propose

to file any rejoinder.

4 Ms.Shruti Pathak, learned AGP, drawing the attention of the Court

to the affidavit-in-reply would submit that the petitioners are not entitled

to the benefit that was extended to the petitioners of Special Civil

Application No. 14335 of 2014 in view of the fact that they neither have

raised any objections at any stage before the respondent authorities, nor

they have approached the High Court at the relevant point of time after

the award was passed. They have approached the Court after a lapse of

almost seven to eight years of passing of award. She further submitted

that the petitioners had a statutory remedy to challenge the award and also

further seek reference under Section 18 which for the reasons best known

to the petitioners they have not chosen to prefer. She places reliance on

the decision in the case of Manoj Kumar Pandey and Ors vs. State of

C/SCA/6458/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2021

U.P and Ors., reported in (2006) ILR 2 All 593.

5 Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels

appearing for the respective parties, we note that in an identical case in

Special Civil Application No.10976 of 2020 we have passed the

following order:

"1 We have heard Ms.Dipmala Desai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.D.M.Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State respondents.

2 In response to the order dated 09.09.2020, Shri D.M.Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader has filed an affidavit-in-reply.

3 In the order dated 09.09.2020, we have recorded the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners to the effect that the writ petitioners were seeking benefit of the earlier judgment of this Court dated 19.03.2019 passed in a bunch of Special Civil Applications, led by Special Civil Application No. 14335 of 2014. The said judgment of the Division Bench is filed as Annexure-H to the petition. In the affidavit filed today, it is not disputed that the lands of the present petitioners were also covered by the same acquisition which was decided by the Division Bench on 19.03.2019.

4 We accordingly, dispose of this appeal extending the same benefits to the present petitioners as have been provided in the aforesaid judgment dated 19.03.2019."

6 The decision relied upon by Ms. Pathak, learned AGP, in the case

of Manojkumar Pandey (supra) is of no help as far as the objections

raised by the learned Assistant Government Pleader are concerned. In the

judgment of the Apex Court on which reliance is placed by the Allahabad

High Court while deciding the issue, the Allahabad High Court has

C/SCA/6458/2021 ORDER DATED: 06/07/2021

considered the case where the persons had approached the Court within

one year when the select list / merit list was alive. The decision of the

Allahabad High Court in the case of Manojkumar Pandey (supra),

therefore was in context of the legal position as to subsistence of the

waiting list / select list.

6.1 In the present case, it is a categorical observation of the Division