SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Guj) 24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Sunita Agarwal, C.J., D.N.Ray, J.
Sureshbhai Ravajibhai Ahir & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Competent Authority, National Highway Authority Of India And Deputy Collector, Navsari (Expressway) & Ors. – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 3198 of 2026, R/Special Civil Application No. 3221 of 2026
Decided On : 10-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr A J Yagnik, Mr. Tushar L Chauhan
For the Respondent: Ms. Hetal Patel, Asst. Government Pleader, Mr. Pradip D Bhate, Nanavati & Co.

Additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the 2013 Act includes the total market value calculated with a multiplication factor, reflecting the intent to compensate for fluctuations in land prices during acquisition.

Headnote:(A) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 30(3) - National Highways Act, 1956 - Petitioners claimed additional compensation based on multiplication factor under the Act, but were denied benefits of Section 30(3) on total computed value - Court held that additional compensation should include the total market value as calculated with the multiplication factor - Decision based on court precedent upholding interpretation of market value and compensation under the Act from previous cases. (Paras 5-20)

(B) The term 'market value' must be interpreted consistently and includes all calculations under Section 26, acknowledging the intention of compensating for land price fluctuations during acquisition proceedings. (Paras 110-112)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the calculation of compensation for land acquired under the National Highways Act, asserting entitlement to additional compensation due to the application of a multiplication factor on market value, which was not granted in initial awards.

Findings of Court:
Court agreed that the petitioners are entitled to additional compensation @ 12% on the market value including the multiplication factor from the date of notification up to the date of the original award.

Issues: Whether additional compensation should be calculated including the multiplication factor stipulated under Section 26(2) of the Act, and the right to claim interest under Section 80.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the additional compensation under Section 30(3) must include the total market value determined under Section 26 including the multiplication factor, rejecting contrary interpretations.

Result: Writ petitions partly allowed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners claim additional compensation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court references prior cases for precedent. (Para 3 , 4)
3. petitioners demand statutory benefits under various sections. (Para 5 , 6)
4. interplay of various sections in determining compensation. (Para 8)

JUDGMENT :

SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.

1. The petitioners herein are aggrieved by non-award of benefit of Section 30 sub-section (3) of the the RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT , 2013 (for short, the Act’ 2013”), on the market value computed by application of the multiplication factor 2, which was granted vide award dated 19.03.2020 / 05.08.2020.

2. The contention is that the award dated 19.03.2020 / 05.08.2020 with respect to the lands in question though determined market value by application of multiplication market value under Section 26(2) of the Act’ 2013 and other statutory benefits, but while granting benefits of additional compensation @12% under Section 30(3) of the Act’ 2013, the market value computed under Section 26(1) has only been taken into consideration, terming the same as the base market value.

3. The issue pertaining to the grant of benefit of additional compensation @ 12% on multiplication factor 2, i.e. the market value computed under Section 26(2) of the Act’ 2013 has been set at rest with the decision of this Court in Special Civil Application No.7561 of 2023 and other cognate matters decided on 23.12.2025.

4. Taking note of the said decision dated 23.12.2025, in a latter judgment and order dated 26.02.2026 in a bunch of writ petition leading being Special Civil Application No.2324 of 2026, the following order was passed:-

“Heard Mr. A.J.Yagnik, the learned advocate for the petitioners, Ms. Maithili Mehta, the learned AGP appearing for the State respondent No.1, Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati, the learned advocate for the respondent No.2 and Mr. Ankit Shah, the learned advocate for the respondent No.3, in all the petitions.

2. In the present set of writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking for the benefits of statutory benefits of additional compensation @ 12% on the market value of the land provided under Section 30(3) of the RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT , 2013 (in short as ‘the 2013 Act’) for the period commending from the date of the preliminary notification published under Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956, till the date of the award or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier, as per the scheme of the said provision.

3. The petitioners would submit that though while making determination of the market value in accordance with Section 26 of the 2013 Act, multiplication Factor-2 was applied with respect to the land-in-question under the award, however, the benefits of the additional compensation as payable under Section 30(3) of the Act, 2013 on the total amount of the market value (including multiplication Factor-2) has not been awarded to the petitioners. The further prayer made in the writ petition is to award interest under Section 80 of the Act, 2013 on the unpaid amount, which was required to be included in the impugned award.

4. The petitioners would also pray for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to grant the benefit of Schedule-II with regard to re-habilitation and re-settlement under the 2013 Act in light of the directives and guidelines issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, appended as Annexure-’A’ to the writ petitions. The further prayer is to extend the benefits of Schedule-III with regard to infrastructural amenities, based on the notification dated 28.08.2015 issued by the Government of India, whereby the First, Second and Third Schedule of the 2013 Act have been made applicable with respect to the acquisition made under the enactments enumerated in the Fourth Schedule of the 2013, Act.

5. It

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top