Gujarat High Court
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anant S. Dave
Urvarshidevi Jaidipsinh Maharaul
Versus
Union of India Thro Secretary & Ors.
Special Civil Application No. 459 of 20131—Decided on 10/03/2014
Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of user in Land) Act, 1962 — Sections 108 and 11(1) — Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963 — Rules 4, 5 and 6 — Acquisition of Right of user in Land — Award by competent authority — Amount of compensation so determined has to be deposited within 21 days from date of intimation — However aggrieved party may prefer application to District Judge within 90 days so provided in the Act — In the instant cases amount of compensation not deposited by respondent Court directed respondent to deposit the amount of compensation with interest at the rate of 6 % interest from the date it became payable and due.
Held :
In the cases on hand, an aggrieved party may prefer application so provided under Section 10(2) of the Act coupled with Rule 5 of the Rules within 90 days from the receipt of intimation under Rule 4 of the Rules, but the amount so determined even “in the first instance” by the competent authority under Sub-section [1] of Section 10 deposit has to be made within 21 days so provided under Rule 6 of the Rules from the date of intimation under Rule 4[3] of the Rules. [Para 10.19]
Admittedly, in all these petitions, the amount of compensation fixed / determined by the competent authority in exercise of powers under Section 10(1) read with Section 4(3) of the Rules, is not deposited by the respondent – GAIL. It is, therefore, directed that the respondent – GAIL shall deposit the compensation fixed / determined by the competent authority with 6% interest per annum as provided under Section 11(1) of the Act from the date when it actually became due and payable under Section 11(2) and Rule 6 of the Rules and shall pay the amount as soon as possible after the compensation has been deposited, as provided under Section 11(3) of the Act, 1962.
[Para 11]
Law Laid Down :
What distinguishes an act judicial from administrative is the duty imposed upon the authority to act judicially.
Anant S. Dave, J.—Draft amendment proposed in Special Civil Application Nos.7766 to 7875 of 2013 is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith.
2. Rule. Learned Counsels for the respondents waive service of Rule on behalf of respective respondents.
All these petitions are taken up for final disposal with consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
3. That Special Civil Application No. 459 of 2013 is taken up as a lead matter, as facts stated therein form basis of the contentions canvassed by the learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties in other matters also.
4. The petitioners have prayed for writ, order or direction against the respondent GAIL in all these petitions to forthwith make payment of compensation to the petitioners as per impugned awards passed by the Competent Authority & Dy. Collector GAIL [India] Ltd. [Gujarat], Vadodara and to declare the action as illegal on the part of the authorities of the GAIL in not following Sections 10 & 11(1) of the Petroleum And Minerals Pipeline [Acquisition of Right of User in Land] Act, 1962 [in short, ‘the Act, 1962’] read with Rules 4, 5 & 6 of Petroleum And Minerals [Acquisition of Right of User in Land] Rules [in short, ‘Rules, 1963’].
5. The details of award and intimation thereof, in all these petitions, are as under:
The operative portion of the award dated 28.08.2012 impugned in Special Civil Application No. 459 of 2013 reads as under:
“The acquiring body is directed to deposit the amount of Rs. 1,20,16,473/in words [Rupees One Crore twenty lacs sixteen thousand four hundred seventy three only], as shown in the Statement 1 and Appendix 7-D, in my current Account No. 31232250887 with SBI Alkapuri branch Vadodara according to Section 11(1) of the P & MP Act.
Any Party aggrieved by this order, shall have an option to apply to District Judge within the limits of whose jurisdiction the land is situated as per provision of the P & MP Act.
Both parties are to be informed accordingly.
I have signed & affixed my seal on every page, and declared this award in open court on the day of 28th August, 2012".
In another case, respondent GAIL is directed to pay interest under Section 11(2) of the Act, 1962 in case the amount awarded is not deposited in time as prescribed under Rule6 of the Rules, 1963.
6. Learned advocates for the petitioners heavily relied on the word “compensation”, as provided under Section 10(1) of Act, 1962 and Rule 4(3) of the Rules, 1963 and contend that as and when compensation under Section 10(1) is determined by the competent authority towards loss or damages or injury sustained by any person interested in land in question under which the pipeline is proposed to be or is being or has been laid, the Central Government, the State Government or the Corporation, as the case may be, shall be liable to pay compensation to such persons and the moment such compensation is determined, the competent authority shall inform the claimant and within time limit prescribed viz. within 21 days of receipt of intimation as above under Rule 6, the Central Government, the State Government or the Corporation in the facts of this case, the respondent – GAIL shall deposit the compensation amount in such treasury as provided under the Rules, 1963. According to learned advocates for the petitioners, admittedly, intimation is given by the competent authority about determination of compensation, as per details provided in Para 5 of this judgment, but till date no amount of compensation is deposited by the respondent – GAIL and instated it has preferred to file application before the concerned District Judge challenging the determination of compensation which is akin to the awards under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 and though the word application is referred under Section 10(2) of the Act, 1962, it is nothing but an appeal and when appeal is filed against an award of compensation, the appellant is duty bound to deposit the amount so that a person interested in the land i
N.V.V. Krishna vs. Union of India & Ors.
Babaji Kondaji Garad vs. Nasik Merchants Cooperative Bank Ltd., Nasik & Ors.
Ashok Leyland Ltd. vs. State of T.N. & Anr.
Hindusthan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. vs. Yashwant Gajanan Joshi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.