Gujarat High Court
Atit Ramniklal Parikh vs The Competent Authority, ... on 3 February, 2022
Bench: Niral R. Mehta
C/SCA/2058/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2058 of 2022
==========================================================
ATIT RAMNIKLAL PARIKH
Versus
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF
INDIA AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
KRISHNAN M GHAVARIYA(8133) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR KM ANTANI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR MAULIK NANAVATI for Respondent(s) No. 2
MR DEVANG VYAS, ASG for Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
ARAVIND KUMAR
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 03/02/2022
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)
1. We have heard Mr. Krishnan Ghavariya, learned advocate for
the petitioner, Mr.K.M.Antani, learned Assistant Government Pleader
for respondent No.1, Mr. Maulik Nanavati, learned counsel for
respondent No.2 (National Highway Authority of India) and Mr.
Devang Vyas, learned Additional Solicitor General of India for
respondent No.3.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of
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
28-6-2017 bearing no. LAQ. Vadodara Mumbai Express Way/
C/SCA/2058/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2022
Fazalpur Compensation Case No. 9/2013 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 the respondents to pay the same,
with interest from 28-6-2017 @ 9% for the first year and 15%
per annum for subsequent years till date of realisation within 6
weeks of the judgement;
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the
petition, your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the
respondents from using, altering, making any construction of
any kind on the land of the petitioners;
(C) Any other and further releases may be deemed just and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may please
be granted.
3. It is the submission of Mr. Ghavariya, learned advocate for the
petitioner that petitioner is an agriculturist and is holding total
agricultural land admeasuring 11-53-36 Ha.Ra.Sq.Mtrs, bearing
Survey No.340 along with his brother Shreyaskumar Ramniklal
Parikh (who is residing abroad) within the ceiling limit prescribed in
village Fazalpur, Taluka : Vadodara (Rural), District: Vadodara. The
said land is under cultivation and he is totally dependent upon it for
his livelihood. The land in question, according to Mr. Ghavariya,
learned advocate is not falling within the limits of any 'transitional
area, smaller urban area or larger urban area' as defined and
specified under Article 243Q (2) and is not part of any area falling
within the limits of any Urban Local body or Municipality or
Municipal Corporation and as such, the land is not covered under any
urban area. According to Mr. Ghavariya, learned advocate, the major
economic activity is agriculture and there are no significant non
agricultural activities in the village or surrounding area and the
village limits of Vadodara Urban Development Area Authority,
C/SCA/2058/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2022
however, no T.P. Scheme is proposed in the area and the lands are
still in agriculture zone. It is contended that by virtue of Notification
dated 03.03.2014, issued by Government of India, in exercise of
power under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956, the
land of the petitioner was undertaken for acquisition for the purpose
of construction of Vadodara - Mumbai Express way and by virtue of
further Notification under Section 3D, published on 05.03.2015, the
lands vested in respondent no.3. It is contended that for the purpose
of compensation, the competent authority passed an award dated
28.06.2017 bearing No.LAQ./Vadodara - Mumbai Express Way/
Fazalpur Compensation Case No. 9/2013 and the market value of the
acquired lands was arrived at and though the land acquired is
situated in rural area, the authority i.e. respondent No.2 applied
factor 1 and not factor 2. Hence, the present petition. The main
grievance raised in the petition is that erroneously respondent no. 2 -
authority applied factor 1 instead of factor 2.
4. At this juncture, learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties submitted that the issue involved in this petition is identical
to the issue decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in case of
Shah Rajesh Manibhai vs. National Highway Authority of India
rendered in Special Civil Application No. 5913 of 2021 dated
23.04.2021. The said order is further based upon a Division Bench
judgment of this Court dated 12.09.2019 passed in a group of
petitions led by Special Civil Application No. 8734 of 2019, which has
since been affirmed by the Supreme Court as the Special Leave
Petition filed by the State Government has been dismissed on
07.01.2021 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. being 18777 of
2020. It is also submitted that the issue in the present case is
identical to the case of Dilipbhai Ganpatbhai Parmar vs. Competent
Authority rendered in Special Civil Application No.12140 of 2021
C/SCA/2058/2022 ORDER DATED: 03/02/2022
dated 27.08.2021. It was, therefore, submitted that this petition may
also be disposed of, following the order passed in Special Civil
Application No.5913 of 2021 dated 23.04.2021. No other submissions
were made.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 - NHAI, further
submitted that as in the other cases if it is found that the petitioner is
entitled to Factor-"2" being applied for determination of
compensation and other benefits, respondent No.2 - authority shall
make deposit within 21 days of such determination.
6. Thus, following the decision of the Coordinate Bench rendered
in Special Civil Application No.5913 of 2021 dated 23.04.2021, the
present petition is disposed of with the same directions and terms as
contained in the order dated 23.04.2021 passed in Special Civil
Application No.5913 of 2021.
7. However, it is clarified that if the petitioner has moved for re-
determination of compensation before the Arbitrator under Section
3G (5) of the National Highways Act, 1956, the petitioner may not
insist for Factor-"2" claim or in the alternative the respondents may
be permitted to appraise the Arbitrator of the said issue, so that
there is no further multiplicity or complications in the proceedings.
8. The present petition, therefore, stands disposed of accordingly.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(ARAVIND KUMAR,CJ)
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
V.J. SATWARA
