Compensation for land acquisition must be fair and just, ensuring that similarly situated landowners in the same village, acquired for the same purpose and period, are treated equally and awarded consistent market value based on established precedents of the same court.

Modification of Order dtd.

ORDER DATED: 13/04/2026

0.6300394352655643

ORDER

Having heard learned advocate for the appellants and having gone through the contents of Note for Speaking to Minute, it is allowed and the observation be inserted in the order dated 07.04.2026 as “It is made clear that the claimants shall not be entitled to for the interest on the amount for the delayed period as already stated while allowing the application for condonation of delay in these appeals.” Accordingly note for Speaking to minute is disposed of. Rest of the order shall remain intact. Fresh Writ be issued accordingly.

NEUTRAL CITATION

Present Order is modified vide C/FA/561/2022 O r d e r d t d . 1 3 / 0 4 / 2 0 2 6 i n ORDER DATED: 07/04/2026 R/FA/561/2022 0.6300394352655643

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 561 of 2022

With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 562 of 2012

With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 564 of 2022

With R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 565 of 2022

PARMAR NATUBHAI PRABHATBHAI & ANR.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Appearance:

MR MANISH S SHAH(5859) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2 MS URVASHI PUROHIT AGP for the Defendant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Defendant(s) No. 2

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI

Date : 07/04/2026

ORDER

1. Since vide the common judgment and award dated 01.12.2012 passed in Land Reference Case Nos.966 of 2010 to 981 of 2010 treating Land Reference Case No.976 of 2010 by the Reference Court i.e. learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Modasa, has given rise to these appeals, all these appeals being decided by this common order.

2. All these appeals are filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhancement in the compensation awarded Rs.50/- per sq mtr to Rs.300/- per sq mtr.

3. The facts, in nutshell, are as under:

3.1 The appellants are owners and occupier of the agricultural lands situated at Village : Dankhneshwar Tal:Bayad, Dist.Arvallia – Modasa, which were acquired for the purpose of construction of Sujlam Suflam Spreading Canal and for that purpose notification under Sections 4 and 6 were published. Upon issuance of Notice under Section 9 of the Act, appellants put forward their claims claiming compensation @ Rs.10,00,000/- per Acre and thereafter Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.6.40/- per sq mtr under Section 11 of the Act vide award dated 02.12.2005.

3.2 Against the said award, appellants preferred Land Reference Cases under Section 18 of the Act claiming an amount of Rs.300/- per sq mtr, however, the Reference Court vide judgment and award awarded Rs.50/- per sq mtr and hence being aggrieved by the said judgment and award the present appeals are filed.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Manish Shah for the appellant and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Urvashi Purohit for the respondent State authorities.

5. Learned advocate Mr.Shah for the appellants relied upon the judgment dated 03.03.2026 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal Nos.4424 of 2025 and allied appeals whereby for an acquisitions of lands of the same village Dakhneshwar for the same period and issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act for the same period, Reference Court awarded Rs.223/- per sq mtr in Reference Case No.197 of 2017 and allied matters and he been pleased to enhance compensation upto Rs.317/- per sq mtr. He would therefore submit that based on the said judgment of the coordinate Bench, which is for the same village having same public purpose and the date of issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act, the present appeals may also be allowed.

6. Ms.Urvashi Purohit, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent State submits that the judgment and order dated 03.03.2026 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal Nos.4424 of 2025 and allied appeals co-relates with the facts of the present case and the said judgment has not been challenged before the Apex Court. In the case of the said judgment passed by the