Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Gohil Baluben Shankarbhai vs Competent Authority, Nhai And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1477 Guj

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1477 Guj
Judgement Date : 9 February, 2022

Gujarat High Court
Gohil Baluben Shankarbhai vs Competent Authority, Nhai And ... on 9 February, 2022
Bench: Niral R. Mehta
     C/SCA/2893/2022                                     ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2893 of 2022

==========================================================
              GOHIL BALUBEN SHANKARBHAI
                          Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NHAI AND SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ISHAN MIHIR PATEL(6508) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR. D. M DEVNANI, AGP, ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT
PLEADER/PP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. MAULIK NANAVATY, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. DEVANG VYAS, ASG for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
       ARAVIND KUMAR
       and
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA

                                 Date : 09/02/2022

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)

1. We have heard Mr. Patel, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.1, Mr. Maulik Nanavati, learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 and Mr. Devang Vyas, learned Assistant Solicitor General 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) direct the respondents to amend/modify/revise the award dated 05.09.2017 bearing no. LAQ.Vadodara-Mumbai Expressway / Sherkhi Compensation Case No. 13/2013 and

C/SCA/2893/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022

re-compute the compensation qua abovementioned 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) ;

(B) direct the respondents to follow and abide by the judgment and order passed by the Hon'ble Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 18777 of 2020 as also the judgment and order passed by this Hon'ble Court in SCA No. 8734 of 2019 and publish the corrected award under section 3-G(1) of the National Highways Act, 1956 qua the petitioners within a period of 8 weeks from the date of order that may be passed in this petition ;

(C) During the pendency of this petition, grant reliefs in terms of paragraphs 8(a) and 8(b) of this petition;

(D) pass any further writ, order of direction as may be deemed necessary in the interest of Justice."

3. It is the contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that agricultural land admeasuring 00.49.69 Hector Are Aq. Mtrs. bearing Block Survey No. 115(70/39, 70/40, 70/44) of Mouje Sherkhi, Tal. District Vadodara belonged to the petitioners. It is contended that on 03.03.2014, a notification was published under section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 wherein it was mentioned that certain lands including the land of petitioners, is planned to be acquired under the Act. Such acquisition is claimed to be for construction of a 324.5 kms - 380 kms long highway (being the Vadodara - Mumbai Expressway). The petitioners' abovementioned land is subjected to acquisition for the said project. It is contended that for the purpose of compensation, the competent authority passed an award dated 05.09.2017 bearing No. LAQ./Vadodara - Mumbai Express Way/Sherkhi Compensation Case No. 13/2013. It is contended that the

C/SCA/2893/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022

authority applied factor 1 and not factor 2. Hence, the present petition. The main grievance raised in the petition is that the 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 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.

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.

C/SCA/2893/2022 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2022

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 redetermination 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) AMAR SINGH

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter