Back
2024 Supreme(Guj) 1555
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J., PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.
Patel Shaileshkumar Becharbhai & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Gujarat & Ors. - Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 16674 of 2023 With R/Special Civil Application No. 16782 of 2023
Decided On : 12-08-2024
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rakesh R. Patel.
For the Respondent: Mr. Krutik Parikh, AGP.
IMPORTANT POINT
Landowners are entitled to compensation for damages caused by incomplete acquisition proceedings, regardless of the government's withdrawal from the acquisition.
Headnote:
Compensation - Land Acquisition - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Sections 26, 48 - The court emphasized the need for compensation for damages caused to landowners due to incomplete acquisition proceedings, highlighting the importance of fair compensation under the law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought compensation for land used for canal construction without proper acquisition proceedings, claiming violations of their rights under the Constitution and relevant land acquisition laws.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the land acquisition notifications were quashed and that the petitioners were entitled to compensation for damages caused during the acquisition process, despite the government's decision to withdraw from the acquisition.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation for damages caused to their lands due to incomplete land acquisition proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that even if the government withdraws from acquisition, landowners are entitled to compensation for damages incurred during the process, as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act.
Result: The writ petitions are disposed of with directions for computation of damages to the landholders.
ORDER :
Sunita Agarwal, C.J.
1. By means of the present writ-petitions, the petitioners (24 in numbers) seek a writ of mandamus commending the respondents to pay compensation by making an award under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for the lands belonging to the petitioners herein, as they were utilised for the purpose of canal without any statutory land acquisition proceeding in violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India.
2. The statement in the writ-petition is that for the purpose of construction of Ladol distributary canal of Dharoi canal passing through Village: Gavada, land acquisition proceedings appear to have been initiated in the year 2009 and thereafter, land acquisition cases No. 27/2011 and 28/2011 were registered by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The possession of respective lands of the petitioners have been taken by the respondent No.3 namely the Executive Engineer, Dharoi main canal division, Dharoi Dam, Dharoi, Taluka: Satlasana, District: Mehsana. The respondent No.3 had also started digging work of the canal in question by giving an initial amount towards lump-sum compensation with assurance that the final compensation would be determined after declaration of the land acquisition award. The date of acquisition notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as indicated in paragraph Nos. 6 and 7 of the writ-petition are 6.2.2012 and 23.5.2013. It is further stated in Para-9 of the writ-petition that after issuance of notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, no further proceedings appear to have been undertaken.
3. We may note that writ-petition is filed after a period of 10 years in the month of August, 2023, with the assertion that the petitioners have got information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 by moving an application dated 14.11.2022, wherein the details in the form of hand written chart has been provided stating that part payment of compensation to the land holders of Land Acquisition Case Nos. 27/2011 and 28/2011. A copy of the communication dated 12.12.2022 sent by respondent No.3 in response to application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 moved by the writ petitioners is also appended at Annexure "C" to the writ-petition.
4. It seems that a written instruction was supplied by the learned AGP on 8.11.2023 before this Court to the effect that a decision has been taken at appropriate level to withdraw from the acquisition proceedings of the lands in question, i.e. not to go ahead with the construction of the canal, the purpose for which the lands in question were acquired vide notifications dated 6.2.2012 and 23.5.2013. Noticing the provisions of Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it was recorded that as per the contentions in the written instructions, the petitioners have themselves levelled the land in question and they are utilising the same for agricultural operations. It was further observed therein that the petitioners are entitled for compensation for the damages caused to their lands during the course of the proceedings for the acquisition drawn by virtue of the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, even if the State Government has decided to withdraw from acquisition by virtue of Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The response of the Collector has, thus, been sought.
5. Pursuant to the said order, the affidavit dated 6.1.2024 was filed by the Collector stating that initially some exercise of digging of lands in question was conducted, but later it was decided that the lands in question were not needed for the purpose for which they were acquired. The stand of the Collector in the aforesaid affidavit is that amongst the petitioners, there are certain land owners, whose lands had neither been proposed to be acquired nor dug up.
6. In the order dated 01.04.2024 this Court has no
