JUDGMENT :

ORDER ON FIRST APPEALS NO.1474 AND 1475 OF 2013

1. The present appeals emanate from the judgment and award dated 27.04.2012 passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.525/2009 and 526/2009 (Old L.A.R. Case Nos.1366/2001 and 1367/2001), wherein and whereby, the Reference Court has ordered an additional compensation of Rs.264=60 for land acquired by the appellant – ONGC at village Pansar, Taluka : Kalol, District : Gandhinagar, for which, Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for shot, “the Act”) was published in the Government Gazette on 28.08.2000 and the Notification under Section 6 of the Act, was published on 15.03.2001.

2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Khare, appearing for the appellant – ONGC has submitted that the award of compensation for acquiring the aforesaid land of Village Pansar, was the subject matter of consideration before the Apex Court and by the order dated 19.01.2022 passed in Civil Appeal Nos.385-386 of 2022 and allied appeals, the Apex Court has ultimately ordered to restore the compensation awarded by the Reference Court in the respective awards. However, it is submitted that in the present case, the claimants would not be entitled to the amount, as awarded by the Reference Court i.e. Rs.264/- and instead they would be entitled to Rs.241/-. It is submitted that though the Notification, which was subject matter of the present appeals, is of the same date and for the same village, which was considered by the Supreme Court, still they are not entitled to the amount awarded by the Reference Court. He has referred to the judgment of the Reference Court of Land Reference Cases Nos.722 of 2012 to 723 of 2012, which pertains to the acquisition of the land of very same village. He has referred to the observations made by the Reference Court in paragraph No.19 and has submitted that for village Pansar, in fact the Reference Court has determined an additional compensation of Rs.231/-, over and above Rs.10/- i.e. Rs.241/- and hence, the observations of the Apex Court in the said order will not be applicable to the claimants of the present appeals. Thus, he has submitted that though the Supreme Court has restored the compensation awarded by the Reference Court with respect to the very same village, for which, the Notification under Section 4 of the Act, was also issued on the same date, the compensation is required to be reduced to Rs.241/- instead of Rs.264/-.

3. Per contra, learned advocate Mr.Dave, appearing for the claimant(s) has submitted that the amount awarded by the Reference Court of Rs.264/- (i.e. additional amount of Rs.254/-, over and above of Rs.10/-) is not required to be disturbed and reduced as per the submissions advanced by the learned advocate Mr.Khare. He has submitted that in fact, the Reference Court has awarded the aforesaid amount after considering the documentary as well as oral evidence, with regard to the land acquired of village Pansar, which has been confirmed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos.387-392 of 2022 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.7092-7097 of 2017), which has been disposed of by the order dated 19.01.2022, ordering the restoration of the compensation awarded by the Reference Court and hence, the order passed by the Supreme Court is required to be maintained.

4. I have heard the learned advocates for respective parties.

5. It is not in dispute that for the land acquired of village Pansar, for which the Section 4 Notification has been published in the official gazette on 28.08.2000, such acquisition of land was subject matter of reference being Land Acquisition Reference Nos.722 of 2012 to 723 of 2012. In the present appeals, the Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.525 of 2009 to 526 of 2009 of very same village Pansar of which, the Notification under Section 4 of the Act, was published on 28.08.2000 is challenged. The Reference Court, after analyzing the documentary as well as oral evidence and on the judgment of LA