Gujarat High Court
Special Land Acquisition Officer vs Patel Vishnubhai Dahyabhai on 29 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1736 of 2015
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1742 of 2015
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1743 of 2015
With
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 1745 of 2015
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ANR.
Versus
PATEL VISHNUBHAI DAHYABHAI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ROSHNI PATEL AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR.SUBHASH G BAROT(2619) for the Defendant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 29/07/2025
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. These appeals are filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act and Section 96 of the Civil Procedure
Code against the common judgment and award dated
29.09.2014 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Kadi, District: Mehsana in Land Acquisition
Reference Case Nos.1557 of 2013 to 1573 of 2013
(Present Appeals pertain to L.A.R. Case No.1559 of 2013
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
and 1567 of 2013) whereby the Reference Court has
awarded the compensation and awarded additional
amount of Rs.265.00 per square meter.
2. The facts of the present case are that the appellants
have acquired the land situated at Village: Meda Adaraj,
Taluka: Kadi , District: Mehsana for construction of Agol
Minor-2 under Narmada Canal Project. Notification under
Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on
9.6.2011 and Notification under Section 6 of the Land
Acquisition Act was published on 17.12.2011. The award
under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act dated
19.3.2013 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer
in Land Acquisition Case No. 8/2010 and allied cases
whereby appellant No.1 herein has awarded the
compensation at Rs.17.29/- per square meter. Being
aggrieved by the said award, the claimants have
preferred Land Reference Cases before the Reference
Court whereby the Reference Court awarded additional
compensation at Rs.265.00 per square meter.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and award, the appellant has preferred the
present appeal.
4. Heard Ms. Roshni Patel, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for the appellant and Mr. Barot, learned counsel
for the respondents.
5. Ms. Patel, learned AGP for the appellant-State has
contended that similarly situated respondents, against
whom the State has preferred an appeal, some of the
appeals have been settled before the Lok Adalat and
therefore, under such circumstances, it is not open for
the respondents-claimants to raise the contention that the
appeals were not decided on merits.
5.1 Ms. Patel, learned AGP has submitted that the
Reference Court has committed an error in exercising the
jurisdiction, which is not vested in it by law. She has also
submitted that the Reference Court has committed an
error in awarding the additional compensation on higher,
side over and above the compensation already awarded
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
6. As against that, Mr.Barot, learned Advocate appearing
on behalf of the respondents - original claimants has
raised an objection with regard to considering the First
Appeal on its merits. Learned Advocate has submitted
that as such, the impugned judgement and award was
passed in a common group of LAR cases, whereas
according to the learned Advocate, in some of the LARs,
the appellant State either did not file any appeal or
having filed appeals, have not contested the same more
particularly since, as per the policy of the State
Government, any amount awarded less than Rs.5,00,000/-
would be treated as a petty claim, against which no
appeal is required to be filed or to be heard on merits.
7. Mr. Barot, learned counsel for the respondents has
further submitted that other group of appeals arising
from the same acquisition has been settled in the Lok
Adalat on the ground of petty claim, whereby, the State
has already accepted the award passed by the Reference
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
Court and now it is not fair on the part of the appellant
State to argue the present appeal on merits and
therefore, the present appeal is required to be dismissed.
He has also submitted that the State has taken decision
either not file an appeal or having file an appeal but not
to contest some of the LAR cases of the very selfsame
group and therefore, the State Government may not be
permitted to adopt the policy of pick and choose.
7.1 Mr.Barot, learned counsel for the respondent has
relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
case of Shivappa Etc. Etc. Vs. The Chief Engineer &
Ors., in Civil Appeal Nos.2694-2700 of 2023, wherein
the Hon'ble Apex Court had observed that in a similar
situation, where group of appeals were preferred against
a common judgement and award, and whereas the State
Government had withdrawn some of the appeals,
therefore, the State Government could not be permitted
to contest the other appeals. Relevant observations at
paragraphs 9 to 11 are reproduced herein below for
benefits:-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
"9. In the said case also, the Reference Court had
granted compensation at the rate of Rs.4,61,250/- per
acre. The High Court, vide order dated 8.3.2016 has
allowed the said appeal(s) to be withdrawn and the same
had been placed on record before this Court in I. A.
No.59170 of 2016. Though a period of more than six
years had lapsed, the said position is not contested by
the respondents.
10. The State or its instrumentalities cannot be
permitted to adopt an attitude of pick and choose.
11. If the State has accepted the award of the Reference
Court in respect of some of the claimants, it cannot be
permitted to adopt a different treatment to the other
claimants. Such an attitude smacks of patent
discrimination."
8. Considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex
Court and considering the submissions on behalf of
learned advocates, since the appellant does not dispute
the fact that the appellant either, after having preferred
appeals in other LAR Cases, had withdrawn some of them
as the claim as per the Circular was petty claim and
thereafter, merely on account of the fact that the
additional amount awarded to the present claimants
exceeds the cut-off for a petty claim, the State
Government would not be permitted to question the
same, more particularly since the State has accepted the
very same award of the learned Reference Court with
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
regard to other claimants. As observed by the Hon'ble
Apex Court, such an attitude would smack of patent
discrimination and cannot be countenanced.
9. In view of the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex
Court and in view of the facts narrated herein above, I am
of the opinion that the present First Appeals may not be
permitted to be contested and is hereby dismissed. It is
clarified that present order shall not be treated as
precedent in any other matter.
10. The amount deposited by the appellant- State shall
be disbursed in favour of respondents- claimants after
following due procedure through R.T.G.S. / N.E.F.T.
within period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of
copy of this order. Interim relief, if any stands vacated
forthwith. Record and proceedings if received, be sent
back to the concerned Reference Court forthwith.
11. At this stage, it is brought to the notice of this Court
that so far as First Appeal Nos. 1743 of 2015 and First
Appeal No. 1745 of 2015 are concerned, the said appeals
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/FA/1736/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
have already been disposed of by coordinate bench of this
Court in the Lok Adalat vide order dated 8.4.2017, in view
of amicable settlement arrived at between the parties,
however the claimants of the said appeals have not
received any amount of compensation till date. The copy
of the orders dated 8.4.2017 passed by the coordinate
bench of this Court in First Appeal Nos. 1743 of 2015 and
1745 of 2015 are supplied by learned advocate.
12. In view of the above, it is clarified that in view of the
order passed by this Court in present appeals, if the
claimants of First Appeal Nos. 1743 of 2015 and First
Appeal No. 1745 of 2015 have not received any amount of
compensation, the amount of compensation shall be
disbursed in favour of those claimants as well, after
verifying their bank details through RTGS / NEFT.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
