Gujarat High Court
Anandiben W/O Ramanbhai Somabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 6 May, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15225/2024 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15225 of 2024
==================================================
ANANDIBEN W/O RAMANBHAI SOMABHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAHESH BHAVSAR (1781) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MRS HM BHAVSAR(5340) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MS. HETAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. MAULIK G. NANAVATI, ADVOCATE FOR NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the
Opponent(s) No. 4
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 06/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
[1] Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati, learned advocate has put in
appearance on behalf of the National Highway Authority of
India. Ms. Hetal Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader
appears for the respondent No.1. There is no reason for
impleadment of the respondent No.2 who has been impleaded
by name as Special Land Acquisition Officer, Himmatnagar,
Sabarkantha when there is no allegations of mala fide against
him in the writ petition. We, therefore, do not find any reason
to call upon the respondent No.2 for disposal of the present
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15225/2024 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
petition. As regards respondent No.3, the same is a formal
party, inasmuch as, the acquisition notifications were issued
under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to
as "the Act").
[2] Coming to the facts leading to filing of the present
petition, we may record that the present petition has been filed
with the following prayers:-
"9.(a) To allow the present application;
(b) To issue appropriate directions to the respondent
No.2 to pay reaming amount i.e. 81,60,031 Rs/- to the
present petitioner within 2 weeks with 9% interest from 1 st
June 2023 till date, in the interest of justice.
(c) To pass such other and further order/s as deemed
fit, just and proper by this Hon'ble Court."
[3] The petitioners (10 in number) claim to be owners of land
bearing Survey / Block No.476 of village - Lavarpur, of which
two parts, namely Revenue Survey No.476 paiki (New Survey
No.108), New Khata No.635 (Old Khata No.535) and Revenue
Survey No.476 paiki (New Survey No.110), New Khata No.134
(Old Khata No.34) had been acquired by notifications under
Sections 3A and 3D of the Act dated 25.02.2011 and
21.09.2011; respectively.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15225/2024 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
[4] It is the case of the petitioners that two separate awards
dated 29.02.2016 were passed with respect to the lands in
question applying Factor-I. However, on a writ petition filed by
the petitioners, namely Special Civil Application No.2703 of
2023, on the directions issued by this Court in the judgment and
order dated 21.03.2023, revised award applying Factor-II was
passed on 10.08.2023. In paragraphs '2.5' to '2.8' of the writ
petition, the petitioners have given the description of four (4)
communications dated 10.08.2023 for different areas of
Revenue Survey No.476 calling upon the petitioners to submit
proof of their title for the purpose of disbursement of
compensation, though the statements therein about the said
communications being awards are incorrect. In paragraph '2.9'
of the writ petition, it is further sought to be submitted that
there was a breach of directions contained in the judgment and
order dated 21.03.2023 of this Court in Special Civil Application
No.2703 of 2023 and hence, the petitioners filed a contempt
petition, namely Misc. Civil Application No.2180 of 2024, which
was later withdrawn and dismissed as such vide judgment and
order dated 09.10.2024.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/15225/2024 ORDER DATED: 06/05/2025
undefined
[5] Further contention in paragraphs '3' and '4' of the writ
petition is that total amount of Rs.1,58,52,276/- was the
awarded amount and the respondents have not deposited the
amount of Rs.81,60,031/-. Besides that there is no assertion as
to whether the petitioners have approached the Competent
Authority in response to the communications dated 10.08.2023,
for disbursement of the compensation amount along with the
necessary documents. The statement made in the writ petition
are cryptic. Be that as it may, as the petitioners have not come
with correct and complete facts, it is not possible for us to issue
any positive mandamus. However, it is kept open for the
petitioners to approach the competent authority for redressal of
their grievances. The dismissal of the present petition will not
come in the way of the petitioners.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.)
DHARMENDRA KUMAR
