Gujarat High Court
Hasmukh Shantilal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 9 October, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14012 of 2025
==========================================================
HASMUKH SHANTILAL PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIK G. NANAVATI, ADVOCATE FOR NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MS HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.
JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 09/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and
perused the record. The present petition has been presented
on 29.09.2025 with the following reliefs:-
"6(a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus declaring that the
acquisition proceeding commenced under preliminary
notification dated 11.03.2020 issued under Section 11 of
the Act (Annexure P-2) has lapsed on account of non-
publishing of declaration under Section 19(1) of the Act
within a period of 12 months from publication of the
preliminary notification;
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or
direction in the nature of writ of mandamus quashing and
setting notification dated 4.01.2022 under Section 19(7) of
the Act (Annexure P-3) containing decision of the State
Government to extend the time for making the declaration
under Section 19(1) of the Act by 01 year with
retrospective effect from 11.03.2021 as being wholly
without jurisdiction and therefore nullity in the eye of law;
(c) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or
direction in the nature of writ of mandamus quashing and
setting notification dated 4.01.2022 made under Section
19(1) of the Act (Annexure P-4) published beyond a period
of 01 year from publication of notification under Section
11 of the Act as also the award dated 27.04.2022
(Annexure P-5) determining compensation as being null
and void and non-existent in the eye of law.
(d) Issue a writ of mandamus or a writ, order or
direction in the nature of mandamus declaring that the
petitioners have been unlawfully dispossessed of their
land, which otherwise has not lawfully vested in the State
Government, and pass an order directing restoration of
the land to the petitioners or alternatively direct
computation of compensation payable to the petitioners as
per the current date market value of the land;
(e) To pass an ex parte ad interim order restraining the
Requiring Body to undertake any activity over the land
claimed to have been acquired in continuation of process
initiation under preliminary notification dated 11.03.2020
pending the hearing and final disposal of the present
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
petition;
(f) Pass any other order in favour of the petitioners as
this Hon'ble Court deem fit in order to further ends of
justice."
2. The facts relevant to decide the controversy on hands
are that the land in question, belonging to the petitioners
herein [four in numbers], had been acquired for the purpose
of a Railway Project of gauge conversion of "Miyagam Karjan-
Dabhoi - Samalayla" railway line for and on behalf of the
Western Railway, in accordance with the provisions of the
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [in
short as 'The Act, 2013']. A copy of the preliminary
notification under Section-11(1) of the Act, 2013 is at
Page-'32' of the paper-book which dated 11.03.2020. A
perusal thereof indicates that the acquisition is of lands area
0-68-76 hectares situated at Dabhoi Taluka of Vadodara
District for the project in question. The notification contains
description of various parcels of land in the schedule attached
thereto. The lands in question, subject matter of consideration
herein comprised of four plots having total area of 1667 sq.
mtrs. as under:-
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
Sr. Name of the Owner Description of Area Occupied
No. Land (sq. mtrs.)
(Survey No.)
1. Patel Hasmukhbhai 490 605 sq. mtrs.
Shantibhai
2. Patel Maheshbhai 1415 353 sq. mtrs.
Ambubhai
3. Patel Narendrabhai 465 334 sq. mtrs.
Kantibhai
4. Patel Satishbhai 523 375 sq. mtrs.
Total Area 1667 sq. mtrs.
3. The notification under Section 19(1) of the Act, 2013 has
been published on 04.01.2022. With the aid of a further
notification under Section-19(7) dated 04.01.2022 extending
the time period for publication of the notification under
Section-19(1), the declaration notification of the same date i.e.
04.01.2022 was published. The appropriate Government, thus,
has exercised the power for publication of the notification
dated 04.01.2022 under Section-19(1) of the Act, 2013 as per
the second proviso to Sub-section (7) of Section-19 which
confers power upon the appropriate Government to extend
the period of 12 months, if in its opinion circumstances exist
justifying the same.
4. It is further pertinent to note that in continuation of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
acquisition proceedings, the award has been declared on
27.04.2022 and the compensation determined under the
award has been deposited by the acquiring body. The further
statements in the writ petition are that the compensation
amount has also been disbursed and received by the
petitioners herein; possession of the lands has been taken
over by the State Government and handed over to the
acquiring Body namely the Western Railway and further that
the work of the project-in-question has already commenced. It
is, however, pertinent to note that though the statements in
this regard can be found in paragraph-2.8 of the writ petition
but there is complete silence about the dates on which the
compensation amount had been received by the petitioners,
the possession of the land-in-question has been taken and the
work of the project-in-question was commenced.
5. Without any explanation as to the period of 03 years
latches in filing the present petition, the petitioners are
seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings had
lapsed on account of the wrong exercise of power on the part
of the appropriate Government in issuing notification dated
04.01.2022 under the second proviso to Sub-section (7) of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
Section-19.
6. We may also note that there is no dispute about the fact
that the petitioners were well aware of the acquisition
proceedings throughout the process and there is not even a
whisper in the writ petition as to any action if initiated by the
petitioners to challenge the notification issued under Section-
19(1) read with Section-19(7), at the relevant point of time or
agitate the issue before any court of law.
7. The petitioners remained not only silent spectators of
the acquisition proceedings and also participated in the
exercise of the preparation of the award under Section 23 of
the Act, 2013 and have also received compensation without
any demur.
8. The result is that the acquisition proceedings have been
brought to its logical end and the public work for which the
land-in-question has been acquired, had already commenced.
At this stage, after more than 03 years, it is not permissible
for us to sustain the challenge for the simple reason that land-
owners who remained silent inspite of due knowledge of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
acquisition proceedings and have acquiesced with the
proceedings by even receiving compensation cannot be
permitted to turn around and say that the acquisition
proceedings had lapsed on account of illegal or wrong
exercise of power on the part of the State Government so as
to hold them entitled for a higher amount of compensation.
9. In so far as the challenge to the exercise of power under
Section 19(7) of the Act, 2013 on the part of the appropriate
Government is concerned, the aid is taken to the decision of
the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad in Writ Petition
No.3420 of 2019 decided on 01.05.2020. Much reliance has
been placed to the observations made therein that the
extension order passed under Section 19(7) of the Act cannot
be said to be a valid exercise of power under the second
proviso to Section-19(7) because such extension can only be
granted within the 12 months period from the date of expiry
i.e. before the expiry of the period of one year from the date of
publication of the notification under Section-11.
10. Pertinent is to note that the said observations were
made by the Telangana High Court in the writ petitions filed
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
in the month of April, 2019 itself, where extension order
issued by the appropriate Government was dated 28.02.2019.
There was absolutely no latches or acquiescence on the part
of the petitioners therein. The ratio of the said decision, as
such, would be of no help to the petitioners herein. Same is
the position in two other decisions of the Karnataka High
Court in Writ Petition No.108902 of 2016 decided on
29.01.2024 and Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition
No.22704 of 2024 decided on 28.08.2024, relied by the
learned counsel for the petitioners.
11. In so far as the decision of the Apex Court in the case of
Nareshbhai Bhagubhai & Ors. Vs. Union of India
reported in 2019 (15) SCC 1, where the Apex Court had
dealt with the challenge to the acquisition under the Railways
Act on the ground of non-adjudication of the objections filed
by the land-owners under Section-20D of the Railways Act.
Pertinent is to note that the issue before the Apex Court was
that in absence of an order passed on the objections under
Section-20D whether the consequential steps could be
invalidated. The challenge by the land-owners in the said
matter before the Apex Court was raised at the relevant point
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
of time, i.e. in the year 2013 itself when awards were passed
under Section 20A of the Railways Act, 1989. The facts noted
by the Apex Court in the decision clearly reflect that the
appellants, who raised the challenge had filed RTI application
in the year 2013 itself before the competent authority seeking
a certified copy of the order passed on the objections filed by
them. On communication of the said orders, the appellants
therein had challenged the acquisition proceedings though
with some delay, on the ground that no order had been passed
on the objections in accordance with Section-20D(2) of the
Railways Act. The appellants also prayed for quashing and
setting aside of the acquisition notifications. The Apex Court,
upon making an inquiry about the manner in which the
objections filed by the appellants therein had been dealt with
by the competent authority, has reached at the conclusion
that the entire exercise of power in publishing notifications
without dealing with the specific objections of the land-
owners/appellants therein, denying the valuable right of the
land-owners, was illegal. However, the relief was
appropriately moulded qua the appellants therein with the
observations in Paragraph-'38' of the judgment that the land-
owners who were satisfied with the amount awarded and have
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
not approached the Court will not be entitled to get any
benefit of the said decision. The relief of additional
compensation was granted to the appellant therein as per the
current market value of the land-in-question in view of the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the said case.
12. The aforesaid decision of the Apex Court as relied by the
learned counsel for the petitioners to press the alternative
prayer made in the present petition to mould the relief for
grant of additional/ higher amount of compensation, as such,
will be of no help to the petitioners.
13. The fact remains that the scope of inquiry into the
validity of the acquisition proceedings within the scope of
power of judicial review of the High Court is confined to the
decision making process. The acquisition proceedings having
been undertaken under a statutory provisions can only be
upset in a case where the decision making process is found
contrary to the statutory provision or the decision having been
taken in a malafide or colourable exercise of power. In our
considered opinion, such a scrutiny is not open for us in the
facts and circumstances of the present case where the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/14012/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025
undefined
petitioners themselves have acquiesced with the acquisition
proceedings where they not only have raised no objections
during the entire process but also received the compensation
without any demur, in the year 2022 itself. The challenge in
the present petition is nothing but an afterthought. The
question of valid exercise of power under the second proviso
to Sub-section (7) of Section-19, as such, cannot be seen by us
at this juncture. While weighing the public interest vis-a-vis
private interest on a scale, we are of the view, any
interference at this stage would unnecessary disturb the
process which had already been brought to its logical end and
also cause unnecessary burden to the public exchequer. In the
crux, we do not find any good ground to entertain the present
petition.
14. The writ petition is dismissed being suffered from
inordinate, unexplained latches on the part of the petitioners.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
A. B. VAGHELA
