IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the Acquiring Authority cannot selectively challenge awards for the same subject parcels of land, based on the principle of non-discrimination and consistent treatment.

ORDER :

1. The present First Appeal is filed by the appellant – State of Gujarat through Special Land Acquisition Officer & Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Department, Collector Office, Anand, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) read with Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code, 1908”) challenging the Judgment and Award dated 20.02.2020 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Anand (hereinafter referred to as “the Judge”) in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.86/2014, whereby the learned Judge partly allowed the Reference filed by the respondent herein.

2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are as under :

2.1 It is the case of the appellant that, the land situated at village: Vasad, District: Anand was acquired for the public purpose of Six Lane Highway joining Bagodara-Vataman- Tarapur-Vasad and accordingly, the appellant No.2 herein had undertaken the entire legal process as prescribed in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is further the case of the appellant that, the Notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 18.05.2009, Notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 31.12.2009 and Notification under Section 9 of the Act was also duly published and the hearing was held. Thereafter, in LAQ case No.1 of 2008, the Award under Section 11 of the Act was passed on 25.01.2012, whereby, the appellant No.2 awarded an amount of Rs.51/- per square meter as compensation for AB type land and Rs.80/- per square meter as compensation for CD type land respectively, the appellant authority granted 30% solatium as well as 12% price rise from the date of Notification under Section 4 of the Act till the date of Award. Being dissatisfied by the amount awarded, the present respondent (original claimant) filed reference under Section 18 of the Act seeking Rs.900/- per sq. mtr. as compensation.

2.2 It is the say of the appellants that, the land was acquired for public purpose for which the entire legal process was undertaken and Notification under Section 4, 6 and 9 of the Act were published. The appellant No.2 herein had invited objections against the acquisition of land for which hearing was held, the objections were raised by the interested parties, but no evidence were produced. The compensation under Section 11 of the Act was awarded in due diligence after considering 10 sale instances which were effected between the year 2004 and 2009 which range from Rs.23/- to Rs.112/- per square meter for the Jirayat (non-irrigated) Land. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had taken into consideration various other factors such as location, fertility of the land, crops and prospects of development of the village. The compensation awarded is just, proper and reasonable and the respondent has accepted the said amount of compensation awarded by the appellant No.2 under Section 11 of the Act.

2.3 It is further the case of the appellant that, against the aforesaid Award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the respondent herein preferred Reference under Section 18 of the Act. The learned Judge registered the said land reference as Land Acquisition Reference Case No.86 of 2014. The other References arising out of the same Land Acquisition proceedings registered as Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos.77 of 2014, 79 of 2014 and 81 of 2014 to 86 of 2014. The learned Judge by Judgment and Award dated 20.02.2020 partly allowed the Reference of the respondent herein observing that the respondent is entitled to get compensation of Rs.900/- per Sq. Mtr. for the acquired land. It was also observed that the respondent is also entitled for a 12% price rise which is granted under Section 23(1)(a) of the Act. It was further observed that the respondent is also entitled for 30% solatium under Section 23(2) of the Act. The learned Judge has also awarded 9% p.a. running interest for the period of one year from the date of taking pos