Gujarat High Court
Gurangbhai Chimanbhai Kapadia vs State Of Gujarat on 18 September, 2024
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4797/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4797 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4797 of 2018
==================================================
GURANGBHAI CHIMANBHAI KAPADIA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==================================================
Appearance:
MR RAJESH M CHAUHAN(2470) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,2,2.1,2.2,3,3.1,3.2,4
MS.HETAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 18/09/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
[1] This is a wholly misconceived petition filed with the
prayers as under:-
"7.(A) Your Lordships be pleased to admit and allow the
present petition.
(B) Your Lordship be pleased to issue appropriate writ
order or directions in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ order or directions holding that the acquisition
proceedings (laq case no.26/86) for the land in question
bearing survey no. 633 (P) all, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638, of
village kamala Taluka - Nadiad which had culminated into
reference court award dt 30/4/1998 hereto have lapsed in
view of section 24 of the Right to fair compensation and
Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
Resettlement Act, 2013 and Resettlement Act, 2013.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4797/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
(C) Your Lordship be pleased to issue appropriate writ
order or directions in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ upon the respondent authorities to quash and set aside
the acquisition proceedings for the land in question bearing
survey no. 633 (P) all, 634, 635, 636, 637, 638 of village
Kamala Taluka - Nadiad and also further be pleased to direct
the respondent authorities consider representations dt
1/8/2004, 16/4/2007, 2/9/2008, 19/8/2010
or
This petition treated as representation of petitioner and
respondents authorities consider according to section 24 of
the Right to fair compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013."
[2] It is an admitted fact of the matter that the acquisition
proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1984") with the publication
of notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the Act dated
24.09.1981 and 15.09.1984; respectively, had been brought to
its logical end with the making of the award dated 16.09.1986
under Section 11 of the Act, 1984. From the averments made in
the writ petition, it is admitted that the awarded amount was
received by the petitioner, however, he being aggrieved by the
determination of compensation had filed a reference under
Section 18 of the Act,1984, namely, Land Acquisition Reference
Nos.275 to 277 of 1987, wherein compensation had been
redetermined vide judgment and order dated 30.04.1998. The
First Appeal filed by the petitioner against the order passed by
the Reference Court has been rejected vide judgment and order
dated 15.06.2017. It is also an admitted fact of the matter that
in order to execute the award of the Reference Court dated
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4797/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
30.04.1998, the petitioner had filed the acquisition applications
in the year 1999 and 2006 which had been decided vide
judgment and order dated 19.10.2022, as submitted before us
during the course of argument. The fact remains that the award
of the reference court being the decree of the Civil Court could
have been executed by the executing court and what is the
effect of the order dated 19.10.2022 passed by executing court
is not known to us, as the said order has not been brought on
record.
[3] However, it is sought to be submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that the interest for the delayed
deposit of the compensation award under the Reference Court's
award dated 30.04.1998 has not been calculated by the
executing court and, thus, the petitioner has been deprived of
just compensation determined by the reference court.
[4] Be that as it may, the said issue is not subject matter of
consideration before us for the simple reason that for any
grievances relating to the order passed by the executing court,
the petitioner has to avail appropriate remedy available in law.
However, insofar as the acquisition in question, the plea taken
in the writ petition that the land acquisition proceedings had
been lapsed in view of Section 24 of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred
to as "the Act, 2013") is found misconceived, inasmuch as, in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4797/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/09/2024
undefined
instant case, the land acquisition proceedings had been
concluded much earlier, i.e., on 16.09.1986 when the award
under Section 11 of the Act had been made and later when the
compensation amount had been paid to the petitioner on
22.09.1993.
[5] The relief, as prayed for, in the writ petition cannot be
granted. The petition is accordingly, dismissed.
[6] In view of the order passed in the main matter, connected
Civil Application is disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.)
DHARMENDRA KUMAR
