Back
2021 Supreme(Guj) 624
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VIKRAM NATH, BIREN VAISHNAV, JJ.
PATEL MOHANLAL ISHWARBHAI THRO POA HASMUKHBHAI GULABBHAI PATEL & others - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & others - Respondent
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12425 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2020 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12425 of 2013 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1865 of 2013 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5024 of 2015
Decided On : 19-08-2021
For The Appellant :MR. S.N.SHELAT, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MR. JAL UNWALA, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MS. TEJAL VASHI, ADVOCATE WITH MR. MITUL SHELAT, ADVOCATE WITH MR JV VAGHELA
For The Respondent: MR. MEET THAKKAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER, MR. R.R.MARSHALL, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MR RITURAJ M MEENA
Point of Law: Proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 itself being bad in law and non-est in view of the breach of Section 6 declaration being beyond time, the Oil And Natural Gas Corporation is directed to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the lands in question to the Petitioners.
Headnote:
Constitution Of India,1950 - Article 300A - Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24 – Acquisition of Land - Petitions have been filed by landowners of Village aggrieved by stand of competent authorities in initiating acquisition proceedings qua their lands for purposes of oil exploration by Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Their grievance is that not only have acquisition proceedings been undertaken in contravention of mandate of Sections 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but also as no Awards under Section 11 have been declared proceedings be deemed to have lapsed by virtue of operation of Section 24 of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Part of respondent to continue to occupy property of citizen - It is hardly required to be stated that as per provisions of Article 300A of Constitution no citizen can be deprived of property without due process of law - As on today there is no authority in law shown to Court by learned Counsel appearing for respondents which may support authority of respondent to continue to occupy property of petitioners - Special Civil Application was filed challenging Section 4 and Section 6 notifications respectively on ground that as stand of Competent Authority then was that there was no Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act, proceedings had lapsed.
Finding of the Court :
Special Civil Application and Special Civil Application are concerned Court are informed by learned counsels for respective parties that an amount towards approximate compensation of has been deposited before Registry with direction to invest same and that interest that may accrue on deposit shall be paid to owners of land as per their inter-se share - Proceedings under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 itself being bad in law and non-est in view of breach of Section 6 declaration being beyond time Oil And Natural Gas Corporation is directed to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of lands in question to Petitioners – Court further direct respondent Oil and Natural Gas Corporation to vacate land and remove any material lying on such land within a period of four months from date of receipt of certified copy of Court Order -Court hereby clarify that Oil and Natural Gas Corporation shall vacate lands in question within time frame set out herein above within four months from date of receipt of certified copy of Court order - Court in any event Corporation is not in a position to adhere to time limit of four months as directed further period of maximun two months is granted for Corporation to vacate land together with material lying thereon - Court confirming fact of vacating of land and/or payment of interest in event of it vacating land after extended time of two months and amount shall be refunded only after filing of such certificate of compliance as above after due service to respective counsels appearing for parties.
Result: Ordered Accordingly
ORDER :
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
1. These petitions have been filed by the landowners of Village Koteshwar, aggrieved by the stand of the competent authorities in initiating acquisition proceedings qua their lands for the purposes of oil exploration by the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (for short 'ONGC'). Their grievance is that not only have the acquisition proceedings been undertaken in contravention of the mandate of Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but also as no Awards under Section 11 have been declared, the proceedings be deemed to have lapsed, by virtue of the operation of Section 24 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 1894 Act' and 2013 Act' respectively).
2. Petitioners for Special Civil Application No.1865 of 2013 and Special Civil Application No.12425 of 2015 are same.
3. Special Civil Application No.1865 of 2013 was filed challenging Section 4 and Section 6 notifications dated 6/08/2009 and 4/3/2010 respectively on the ground that as the stand of the Competent Authority then was that there was no Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act, the proceedings had lapsed. Hence they had prayed that the Oil And Natural Gas Corporation be directed to return the possession of the lands forthwith.
4. On 30/04/2013, a Division Bench of this Court after an extensive hearing passed the following order.
“4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that as on today, the proceedings under the Act have lapsed. Consequently, there could be no authority on the part of respondent No.3 to continue to occupy the property of the citizen. It is hardly required to be stated that as per the provisions of Article 300A of the Constitution, no citizen can be deprived of the property without due process of law. As on today, there is no authority in law shown to this Court by the learned Counsel appearing for respondents, which may support the authority of respondent No.3 to continue to occupy the property of the petitioners.
5. It was submitted by Mr.Meena, learned Counsel for respondent No.3 that the well over the land is already dug and there are pipes inside the oil-well having value of crores of rupees and, therefore, even if this Court is inclined to issue prohibitory direction, some reasonable time may be given to respondent No.3 to vacate the same or in alternative, till lawful authority is conferred upon ONGC to continue to occupy the land. As on today, there is no authority and respondent No.3 is also not in a position to show any authority under the law, permitting occupation of the property in question. However, keeping in view the aspect that the oil well exists as stated by respondent No.3 and there may be material lying inside the oil-well, a reasonable time may be required to be given, but with the observations that for the unauthorized occupation by respondent No.3 after the expiry of the period of temporary acquisition till today, they may be required to pay compensation, may be rental or otherwise at a later stage. The total area under acquisition is admeasuring 14616 sq. mtrs., located at Koteshwar Taluka, Gandhinagar and taking into consideration, lease rent as mentioned in the documents at Annexure-B at Rs.1,85,000/- per year, the approximate amount of compensation deserves to be deposited by ONGC in the event the ONGC is desirous to continue to occupy the land for some time, so as to stop its activities or otherwise to get the lawful authority for such purpose.
6. Hence, Rule.
7. By ad-interim order, it is directed that within a period of one month from today, ONGC shall remove all its belongings over the land in question and shall discontinue to utilize the land after the expiry of the period of one month with the further directions that the amount of Rs.50,000/- shall be deposited by way of compensation of the petitioners with this Court. It is also observed that it would be lawful on the part of the petition
