IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12220 of 2019 =============================================

HARPALE NUTANBEN SUMERSINH & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR JIGAR P RAVAL(2008) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,3,4,5,6,7,8 ,9 MS.HETAL PATEL, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 MR.MANISH BHATT, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MUNJAAL M BHATT(8283) for the Respondent(s) No. 4 =============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 16/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. Mr.Manish Bhatt, the learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.Munjal M. Bhatt, the learned advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No.4.

2. In compliance of the order dated 18.11.2025, the affidavit dated 13.12.2025 of the competent authority / Special Land Acquisition Officer and Deputy Collector, Savli, Vadodara has been filed to submit that the award under Section 23 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “the Act’ 2013”) has been declared on 18.08.2017. The compensation was paid to the petitioner on 22.08.2017. On 19.09.2017, the petitioner filed reference under Section 64 of the Act’ 2013 seeking to refer the dispute to the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority (for short, “the LARR Authority”)

constituted under Section 51 of the Act’ 2013.

3. It is further contended that by the Government resolution dated 05.02.2018, the LARR Authority has been constituted for Ahmedabad, Rajkot and Surat. The jurisdiction of Vadodara is encompassed in North and Central zone of Ahmedabad.

4. The application of the petitioner to seek reference of the dispute to LARR Authority constituted under Section 51 of the Act’ 2013 was recorded in the inward register of the office of the respondent No.3, namely the answering respondent. However, since the petitioner had submitted application prior to the appointment of the LARR Authority, though it remained recorded in the inward register, however, inadvertently not forwarded to the authority after its constitution. Copy of the inward register has been placed on record.

5. It is, thus, evident that there is inaction on the part of the competent Authority. Even when the factum of pendency of the application came to its knowledge, due to the intervention of this Court in this petition, no reference has been made.

6. We, therefore, require the Collector, Vadodara to take stock of the situation and issue necessary directions to the competent authority to refer the matter to the LARR Authority under Section

64 of the Act’ 2013, with immediate effect.

7. The Collector, Vadodara is also required to make inquiry at its end about the pending applications of other applicants, if any, and shall issue necessary directions to the officer concerned to dispose of all the applications seeking reference under Section 64 of the Act’ 2013, by issuing due notice and grant of opportunity to each of the applicants. The decisions on the pending applications shall be taken, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

8. With the above observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of. The compliance of this order shall be reported to this Court through the Registrar (General) of the High Court.

(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )

(D.N.RAY,J) SAHIL S. RANGER