Gujarat High Court
Amrutbhai Dahyabhai Patel vs Gujarat Industrial Development ... on 21 February, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16884 of 2021
==========================================================
AMRUTBHAI DAHYABHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AS VAKIL(962) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,4.2
MR SHALIN MEHTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR RD DAVE(264) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 21/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The present Special Civil Application is filed praying for
the following reliefs:
"(A) To quash the allotment letter dated 17.09.2021 (Annexure-1)
and to command the Respondent-GIDC to issue a revised
allotment letter in terms of the price of the land as per the
allotment price pertaining to Ichhapore village/estate
indicated in the statement of such price with effect from
01.04.2015 (Annexure-10) or in terms of paragraph 11 of the
reply letter dated 07.10.2021 (Annexure-2) of the Petitioners
and to give a reasonable time of 60-90 days to pay the same
and to further command the Respondent-GIDC not to include
Goods and Service Tax thereon;
(B) To direct, pending the hearing and final disposal of the
present Special Civil Application, the Respondent No.1-GIDC
to maintain status quo and not to create any third party
interest over the said lands (i.e. the land bearing Survey Nos.
60/5, 61 and 63 part situated at Village Gaviar, Taluka
Choryasi, District Surat);
(C) To provide for costs of the present Special Civil Application;
and
(D) To pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case."
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
2. The factual matrix of the present case is that the land
bearing Survey No.60/5, 61 and 63 Part situated at village
Goviyar, Taluka Choriasi, District Surat were originally of the
ownership of deceased Dahyabhai Kevalbhai Patel. The
petitioners herein are the heirs and the legal representatives of
Deceased Dahyavbhai Kevalbhai Patel. That the Gujarat Town
Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 came into force.
The Surat Urban Development Authority ("SUDA" for sake of
brevity) prepared a draft Development Plan, wherein the lands
were designed as 'Agricultural Zone'. That thereafter, the lands
were notified under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act
and the possession of the subject lands was taken and the award
was also passed. That thereafter a circular dated 18.7.1996
came to be passed by the State Government. Pursuant thereto,
the respondent Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation
("GIDC" for sake of brevity) passed a resolution No.108/No.96
in its 369th meeting dated 26.8.1996 resolving that the GIDC
would submit a proposal to the SUDA to release the lands from
reservation and the possession of the lands acquired be
returned to the original owners on the price of the lands + 35%
+ 25% amount. That by letter dated 5.3.1997, the respondent
GIDC informed late Dahyabhai Patel- original owner of the
subject lands that it had decided to return the lands to its
original owners on payment. That the respondent GIDC passed a
resolution dated 17.10.2003 for the purpose of re-allotment of
the lands to the original owners on the terms and conditions
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
stated therein. The petitioners, thereafter, addressed various
communications to the respondent GIDC to consider their
representation for return of the said lands. By resolution
No.55/Pri-Vitran/488/2016 dated 19.3.2016, it was resolved by
the respondent GIDC that the said lands be returned to the
original owners on "as is where is basis" on payment of
allotment price as prevailing in Ichhapore colony. As no decision
was taken on the representation of the petitioners, the
petitioner herein had preferred Special Civil Application
No.23395 of 2017, wherein by order dated 14.2.2018, the
Division Bench of this Court disposed of the same by directing
the respondent GIDC to decide the representation of the
petitioners within four weeks from the date of receipt of the
order. Since no action was taken pursuant to the order dated
14.2.2018, the petitioners preferred Misc. Civil Application No.1
of 2018 in this Court. By order dated 13.7.2018, the petitioners
were directed to remain present before the respondent GIDC on
17.7.2018 and also directed the respondent GIDC to pass
appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioners. That
by communication dated 30.10.2018, the respondent GIDC
rejected the representation of the petitioners on the ground that
prior permission of the Government for change of use is
required and that the price of the land was not decided by the
District Valuation Committee. Aggrieved, the petitioners
preferred another Special Civil Application No.7254 of 2019
seeking return of the lands to the petitioners as contemplated in
the resolutions dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016. By judgment and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
order dated 18.5.2020, the writ petition of the petitioners was
allowed and the respondent- GIDC was directed to return the
said lands to the petitioners as contemplated in the resolutions
within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the
judgment and order. That thereafter, the petitioners addressed
several letters to the respondent GIDC requesting them to take
action as per the judgment and order dated 18.5.2020. That by
impugned allotment letter dated 17.9.2021, the respondent
GIDC called upon the petitioners to make payment of
Rs.23,48,93,250/- + 18% GST being Rs.4,22,80,785/-, amounting
to total Rs.27,71,74,035/- towards allotment of the subject lands
which are admeasuring 30604 Sq. Mtrs. at the rate of Rs.7650/-
per Sq. Mtr. The petitioners were called upon to make the
payment of Rs.27.71 crore within 30 days from the date of
receipt of the impugned letter, failing which the allotment
would be cancelled. The petitioners once again made a
representation stating that rate of Rs.7650/- per Sq. Mtr. is
wholly unjustified since the maximum Jantri rate in the area was
Rs.3500/- per Sq. Mtr. and no GST was leviable and that the
said GST amount be reduced from the total amount. Since the
respondent GIDC did not respond to the petitioners'
communication dated 7.10.2021 and the petitioners are
apprehending that the respondent GIDC may proceed to cancel
the impugned allotment letter dated 17.9.2021, the present writ
petition has been filed.
3. Mr. A.S. Vakil, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
petitioners, submit that by the impugned allotment letter dated
17.9.2021, the petitioners have been allotted/ returned the
lands bearing Survey Nos.60/5, 61 and 63 Part of Village
Gaviyar, Taluka Choriyasi, District Surat, admeasuring 30,604
Sq. Mtrs., which was originally of the ownership of their
predecessor Dahyabhai Patel at the price and on the terms and
conditions stated therein. He submits that the lands were part
of the preliminary notification issued on 7.2.1980 by SUDA. The
State Government issued notification dated 27.6.1989 under
Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of the large
parcel of the lands, including the lands of the petitioners, for
establishing housing estate by respondent GIDC. Section 9
notification came to be published on 27.9.1990. The lands
though designated in the agricultural zone were released and
kept reserved for residential zone for housing estate by the
respondent GIDC. He submits that since the lands acquired
were never put to use by the respondent GIDC for the purpose
for which it was acquired, the Revenue Department of the State
of Gujarat by letter dated 18.7.1996 required the respondent
GIDC to complete the process for release of the lands. Pursuant
thereto, a resolution dated 26.8.1996 came to be passed to
submit a proposal to SUDA for release of the lands from
reservation. Pursuant thereto, all the acquired lands, including
the lands of the petitioners, came to be released/ deleted from
the reservation by notification dated 17.5.2001 and the lands
came to be designated for residential use. By another resolution
dated 17.10.2003, the respondent GIDC resolve to return the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
lands to the original owners on the terms and conditions stated
therein. He submits that thereafter, by resolution dated
5.7.2016, it was resolved in respect of the lands of the
petitioners that the permission of the Revenue Department will
not be required and that the resolution dated 19.3.2016 be
implemented immediately. He submits that the resolution dated
19.3.2016 was specific to the lands of the petitioners. He
submits that late Dahyabhai - predecessor of the petitioners,
had made payment of Rs.3,15,000/- to the respondent GIDC, by
virtue of which, the petitioners have lien on the subject lands. It
was also recorded by the GIDC that it will be appropriate in the
present case to return the lands to the petitioners as per the
prevailing policy on the price prevailing in the nearby village
Ichhapore. He submits that the nearby owners of the lands
have already been returned the lands. He submits that despite
specific resolution being passed in the year 2016 seeking to
implement the resolution dated 19.3.2016, the same was not
implemented for about 6 years and thereafter, the same was
executed, to the prejudice of the petitioners, by charging the
price of the year prevailing on the date of such implementation/
issuance of the allotment letter. He submits that the word
'immediately' used in the resolution dated 19.3.2016 is required
to be construed as meaning 'within reasonable time'. He
submits that the word 'immediately' implies without undue
delay and within reasonable convenient time for doing
necessary formalities. He submits that the action of the
respondent GIDC ought to have been within a reasonably
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
prompt time. He submits that the respondent GIDC never took
decision on the representation/ application of the petitioners.
Further, despite resolving to return the lands of the petitioner
on payment of price of Ichhapore village, the same were neither
reversed nor reconsidered. The respondent GIDC has been
lackadaisical and the petitioners had to approach this Court by
filing various proceedings, including contempt petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the
judgment and order dated 18.5.2020, this Court had issued two
directions; firstly to return the lands as contemplated under the
resolutions dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016 and secondly, to
return the said lands within a period of three months. He
submits that the said resolutions contemplate only the return of
the lands. That from the conjoint reading of the said resolutions
dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016 and the judgment dated
18.5.2020, the only conclusion that can be reached is that the
lands are required to be returned by the GIDC to the petitioners
at village Ichhapore as per the price prevalent on 19.3.2016.
The said price as per the circular dated 15.7.2015 is Rs.3490/-
per Sq. Mtr. He further submits that the land could not be put to
use by the respondent and the lands in question do not form
part of the GIDC estate. He, therefore, submits that the GIDC is
not entitled to charge 1.5 times to the allotment price of the
industrial plot while returning the lands to petitioners. He
submits that the lands in question are being returned pursuant
to the application dated 27.5.1997 of late Dahyabhai Patel-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
predecessor of the petitioners and further pursuant to the GIDC
resolutions dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016. He submits that no
GST was leviable at the given point of time. The lands are being
returned to the petitioners after a period of 24 years. The
petitioners cannot be held responsible for the enormous delay
by the respondent GIDC to return the lands in question. He
submits that no provisions of law and the GST Act in particular
has been referred by the GIDC to levy such charges. Learned
counsel, thus, submits that levy of GST on the allotment price is
neither permissible nor justified in law. He submits that the
petitioners' right to the return of the subject lands is due to the
amount of Rs.3,15,000/- paid on 27.5.1997 pursuant to the
resolutions of the GIDC and further, the resolutions dated
19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016. That the delay in return of the lands is
purely attributable to GIDC. The payment made by the
predecessor of the petitioners for return of such lands has been
retained by the GIDC from 27.5.1997 till date and if the
respondent GIDC has taken the decision to return the lands only
in the year 2016, then it cannot be said that the petitioners are
being benefited by the current land prices. He submits that the
impugned allotment letter, in the facts and circumstances of the
present case, cannot be termed as reasonable, just and proper.
He, therefore, submits that the present Special Civil Application
be allowed and the respondent GIDC be directed to issue fresh
allotment letter in terms of the price stated in the circular
15.7.2015 at the rate of Rs.3490/- per Sq. Mtr. and by excluding
the Goods Service Tax (GST) on the allotment price.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
5. Per contra, Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior counsel,
assisted by Mr. R.D. Dave, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the respondent GIDC, submits that the present petition is not
maintainable in law as no fundamental or constitutional right of
the petitioners is infringed in view of the impugned
communication of the respondent GIDC. Mr. Mehta submits that
the offer-cum- allotment letter, impugned herein, is issued to
the petitioners in tune with the prevalent policies/ circulars of
the respondent Corporation and does not call for any
interference. Mr. Mehta submits that this Court while issuing
notice vide order dated 22.11.2021 in the present case, has
recorded the grievance raised by the petitioners. Mr. Mehta
submits that vide order dated 18.5.2020, the respondent GIDC
was directed to return the lands in question to the petitioners as
contemplated in the resolution passed by the respondent
Corporation dated 19.3.2016. A perusal of the said resolution
makes it clear that the land is to be returned to the petitioners
on "AS IS WHERE IS BASIS" after withdrawal of the pending
Court case, if any, and upon payment of the allotment price as
prevailing in Ichhapore GIDC Estate. The said resolution also
confers power upon the Vice Chairman and the Managing
Director of the GIDC to implement the said resolutions. For
compliance of the same, the respondent GIDC had initiated
appropriate steps. Mr. Mehta submits that the Regional Office
had issued the communication to the Head Office to clarify the
prevailing allotment price and also sought legal opinion and
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
finally, on 2.8.2021, the competent authority had approved the
allotment in favour of the petitioners as per the prevailing rate
for he allotment of the lands in question. He submits that so far
as the calculation of the rate of the lands is concerned, the same
is mentioned in the circular dated 3.9.2021, which was
prevailing as on the date of allotment of the land. He submits
that on the date of allotment, the prevailing allotment rate of
Ichhapore GIDC Estate was Rs.5100/- per Sq. Mtrs. for
industrial plot and since the land which is allotted for residential
purposes, the GIDC is entitled to recover the allotment price for
the industrial plot at 1.5 times of the allotment as per the said
circular. Therefore, the allotment price mentioned in the
impugned offer-cum allotment letter is purely justified and in
tune with the circulars of the respondent Corporation. Mr.
Mehta further submits that it is common knowledge that
prevalent price is always less than the actual market price
which would be prevailing for the similarly situated nearby
lands. He, therefore, submits that the present petition be
rejected.
6. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused
the documents on record.
7. The petitioners herein are the legal heirs of the original
owner in respect of the lands bearing Survey Nos.60/5, 61 and
63 Part, situated at village Gaviyar, Taluka Choryasi, District
Surat, whose lands came to be acquired by GIDC for residential
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
purpose. Since the lands were never put to use for the purpose
of establishing housing estate, vide circular dated 18.7.1996
issued by the Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat, the
respondent GIDC initiated the procedure for release of the said
lands to all the original owners vide resolution No.108/No.96
dated 26.8.1996. Upon being informed of the release of the
lands, the predecessor of the petitioners had deposited a sum of
₹ 3,25,000/- with the respondent GIDC. Since the lands was not
being returned in terms of the resolution passed by the
respondent GIDC, the petitioners had to initiate various
proceedings seeking directions to release the subject lands and
to be given possession thereof. Several representations were
made and this Court by various orders directed the respondent
GIDC to consider the representations and expedite the process
of release of the lands to the petitioners. Due to various
litigations, the decision of the respondent GIDC to handover the
lands acquired to its original owners could not materialize. The
petitioners then made a representation to the respondent GIDC
to consider and decide their various representations after the
various interim orders passed by the Courts had been vacated.
The petitioners, thereafter, made another representation dated
17.10.2013. The GIDC by letter dated 11.7.2014 called upon the
petitioners to remain present for hearing before the Vice
Chairman and the Managing Director of the respondent GIDC
on 22.7.2014. Accordingly, the petitioners remained present
before the authorities and submitted another letter dated
22.7.2014 with a request to return the lands. The petitioners
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
thereafter made several representations repeatedly requesting
the respondent GIDC to decide their representations for return
of the lands in question. That the respondent GIDC passed a
resolution dated 19.3.2016 resolving that the lands be returned
to the original owners on "AS IS WHERE IS BASIS" after the
withdrawal of the Court cases, if any, and upon payment of
allotment price as prevailing in Ichhapore village. That
thereafter, it appears that the respondent GIDC verified various
documents submitted by the petitioners and thereafter, another
resolution dated 5.7.2016 came to be passed resolving that the
permission of the Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat
would not be required in the present case as it is decided not to
re-grant the said lands under the Land Acquisition Act. That as
there was no response to various representations by the
respondent GIDC, another Special Civil Application No.23395 of
2017 came to be filed by the petitioners to decide the
representations in the matter of return of the lands as directed
by this Court earlier. The said writ petition came to be disposed
of directing the respondent GIDC to decide the representation
within a period of four weeks. That by communication dated
30.10.2018, the respondent GIDC rejected representation of the
petitioners on the ground that prior permission of the
Government for change of use of the said lands was required to
be obtained and that the price of the said land was to be
decided by the District Valuation Committee. Aggrieved, the
petitioners preferred Special Civil Application No.7254 of 2019.
By order dated 18.5.2020, the said writ petition came to be
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
allowed by this Court by holding that the impugned
communication/ order dated 30.10.passed by the respondent
GIDC was contrary to the resolutions passed by the respondent
GIDC. The petitioners were to be treated with priority at par
with the persons whose lands were acquired under the same
notifications and who were also returned the lands way back in
the year 2001. Accordingly, this Court had directed the
respondent GIDC to return the lands to the petitioners as
contemplated in the resolutions passed by the respondent GIDC
dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016. Pursuant to the said order, the
respondent GIDC has passed the impugned order dated
17.9.2021. As per the impugned communication, the petitioners
are called upon to pay ₹ 23,48,93,250/- towards the price of the
lands and ₹ 4,22,80,785/- towards 18% GST. The petitioners are
therefore, called upon to pay total amount of ₹ 27,71,74,035/-.
8. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is
that the petitioners are seeking return of the subject lands since
the year 1997 during which the petitioners had made multiple
representations and approached this Court by way of various
Special Civil Applications, contempt proceedings, etc. The
submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the
petitioners cannot be called upon to pay the price as prevailing
in the year 2021. He submits that the petitioners had already
made deposit of ₹ 3,14,000/- towards the return of the subject
lands in the year 1997. Therefore, in this background, he
submits that as the resolutions for return of the lands were of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
the year 2016, therefore, the petitioners should be granted the
lands at the price prevailing at the time of passing of the
resolutions dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
similarly situated owners of the adjourning lands were already
re-granted the lands in the year 2001 at the price prevailing at
that relevant point of time, however for no fault of the
petitioners, their lands are being released in the year 2021.
Therefore, the submissions of the learned counsel for the
petitioners is that the respondent be directed to re-evaluate the
price of the lands as per the price prevailing in the year 2016.
10. In the considered opinion of this Court, though the
petitioners were litigating for the release of their lands since the
year 1997, no allotment order was passed in their favour as
there were various litigations pending with respect to the
subject lands. The resolutions were passed only in principle. No
further action was taken to fix the price of the lands for
allotment or any allotment was categorically made in favour of
the petitioners. In fact, the respondent GIDC had issued a
communication dated 30.10.2018 rejecting the application/
representation for return of the lands made by the petitioners.
Finally, it is only after this Court vide order dated 18.5.2020,
allowed the Special Civil Application No.7254 of 2019 and
quashed the communication dated 30.10.2018 rejecting the
representations of the petitioners and directing the GIDC to
return the lands to the petitioners as contemplated in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
resolutions dated 19.3.2016 and 5.7.2016, that the respondent
GIDC has taken further action and finally allotted the lands after
valuation. In the considered opinion of this Court, since no
actual allotment was made by the respondent GIDC to the
petitioners till issuance of the allotment letter dated 17.9.2021
or till passing of the order dated 18.5.2020 in Special Civil
Application No.7254 of 2019, no price could be fixed for the
subject lands.
11. In the present case, the respondent GIDC has determined
the valuation of the subject lands from the date of the order
dated 18.5.2020 in Special Civil Application No.7254 of 2019
and in terms of the circular dated 3.9.2021 of GIDC in respect of
the prevailing price. Further, it is also required to be noted that
the respondent GIDC being the statutory and autonomous body
has levied the fixed rate of allotment in respect of the lands in
questions and not the prevailing prices in Ichhapore village as
on the date of allotment, which is stated to be higher. The
allotment is also in terms of the resolution dated 19.3.2016,
wherein it is resolved that he subject lands shall be allotted as
per the prevalent prices of Ichhapore GIDC Estate.
12. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners
that by resolution dated 5.7.2016, the respondent GIDC had
resolved to allot the subject lands to the petitioners on
immediate basis, therefore also, the petitioners were entitled to
allotment on the basis of the prevailing prices as on 5.7.2016, is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
misplaced. The said resolution though resolves to allot the
subject lands to the petitioners on immediate basis, the Vice
Chairman and the Managing Director was authorized to
implement the said resolution. The said resolution thereafter
was not implemented as it was later opined by the GIDC itself
that prior permission of the State Government was required.
The communication dated 30.10.2018 to the petitioners did
record that prior permission of the State Government was
necessary and, therefore, the valuation of the lands in question
for allotment could not be done and in view thereof, the
representation for allotment of the lands could not be
considered. Though the said communication dated 30.10.2018
came to be quashed by this Court vide order dated 18.5.2020
and the respondent GIDC was directed to return the lands to the
petitioners within a period of three months from the order dated
18.5.2020, the said order did not specify that the allotment is to
be done from the date of such resolution and, therefore, the
respondent GIDC was right in fixing the price of the lands as on
the date of allotment including GST as per the circular dated
30.3.2019.
13. For the reasons and observations aforesaid, this Court is
of the considered opinion that no interference is called for in the
allotment order dated 17.9.2021 since the same has been
passed taking into consideration the prevalent circulars issued
by the respondent GIDC in terms of the order dated 18.5.2020
in Special Civil Application No.7254 of 2019. The writ petition is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/16884/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/02/2025
undefined
devoid of merits and is accordingly DISMISSED. No order as to
costs.
FURTHER ORDER
After pronouncement of the order, learned advocate Mr.
A.S.Vakil submits that the interim relief granted pending the
writ petition, may be continued for a further period of 4 weeks.
In the the facts and circumstances, the status-quo order passed
vide order dated 22.11.2021 is extended till 31.3.2025.
Sd/-
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
OMKAR
