IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11 of 2026 ==========================================================

PATEL ARVINDBHAI RATILAL Versus COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER &

ORS.

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

Appearance:

HARSH A VYAS(9330) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR. MOULESH A VYAS(17275) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 4 MR. MAULIK G. NANAVATI FOR NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the Respondent(s) No. 3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 09/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) 1. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, we may note, at the outset, that the present petition has been filed with the relief to seek benefit of multiplication Factor 2 instead of Factor 1, on the ground that the lands in question lying in a rural area and the competent authority / Special Land Acquisition Officer is required to re-calculate the compensation by applying multiplication Factor 2 along with the other statutory benefits including Solatium and additional compensation under Section 30 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, “the Act’ 2013”), besides other benefits such as interest for the delayed payment of compensation as per Section 80 of the Act’ 2013.

2. Mr. Maulik G. Nanavati, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent NHAI, at the outset, would submit that the respondent has no objection in redetermination / recomputation of compensation by applying multiplication Factor 2 with respect to the lands and the statutory benefits under Section 30 of the Act’ 2013, namely the Solatium and additional compensation. However, on the interest under Section 80, it is vehemently argued by the learned counsel for the NHAI that the petitioner has approached this Court for the first time with a substantial delay, inasmuch as, the present petition has been presented on 14.11.2025, whereas the original award was passed on 28.06.2017.

3. The contention is that the dispute with respect to the payment of multiplication Factor 2 has been determined by this Court in the judgment and order dated 12.09.2019 passed in the the Special Civil Application No.8734 of 2019 with allied matters. On a Special Leave Petition filed by the State Government, being SLP (C) Diary No.18777 of 2020, with the dismissal of the SLP vide the judgment and order dated 07.01.2021, the Division Bench judgment dated 12.09.2019 of this Court stood confirmed.

4. The submission is that inspite of the said determination made by this Court, wherein multiplication Factor 2 has been made available to the lands lying in the rural areas in the State with the quashing of the Government resolutions dated 09.02.2016 and 29.07.2016, the petitioner has never laid his claim. The entire writ petition is silent about any effort made by the petitioner to seek compensation by application of Factor 2, prior to filing of the present petition.

5. From the averments made in the writ petition and the material placed before us, it is evident that the petitioner had kept silence for a substantial period from 2019 till November, 2025, in the matter of seeking benefit of multiplication Factor 2. There is no whisper in the writ petition that the petitioner had approached even the competent authority / Special Land Acquisition Officer seeking re-examination of compensation prior to filling of the present petition.

6. For the aforesaid, the liability of interest cannot be saddled upon the acquiring body for the period of delay /

laches on the part of the petitioner.

7. We, therefore, provide that:-

I. The petitioner shall be ent