ORDER

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 11.11.2020 passed in LAR No.123 of 2017 to 141 of 2017 [Old LAR Nos.941 of 2010 to 959 of 2010 @ Modasa], treating Main LAR No.131 of 2017 [Old Main LAR No.949 of 2010] whereby the Reference Court i.e. learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bayad, Dist.Arvalli has granted Rs.201.50 paisa per sq mtr for Jirayat land inclusive of the compensation determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer with statutory benefits and interest.

2. It is a case whereby a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘the Acquisition Act’, for short) dated 06.05.2005, the Deputy Collector and Special Land Acquisition Officer, Himmatnagar intend to acquire subject land being Jirayat land for the public purpose for irrigation scheme i.e. Sujlam Suflam Canal Spreading Scheme from Village:Vatrak, Dist.Bayad, Dist.Sabarkantha. Notification under Section 6 of the Acquisition Act was published on 30.11.2005 and thereafter hearing was provided under Section 9 of the Acquisition Act and the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer of the Act to the tune of Rs.8.50 per sq mtr determining compensation for Jirayat land against the claim of the claimants i.e. Rs.250/- per sq mtr.

3. As stated supra, the Reference Court, in a Reference under Section 18 of the Acquisition Act, was pleased to decide reference in favour of claimant and determine the total compensation Rs.210.50/- per sq mtr. Being aggrieved, the claimants are before this Court by way of present appeals.

4.1 Learned advocate Mr.Manish Shah appearing for the claimants referred to the order passed by this Court in First Appeal No.1057 of 2021 with allied matters, dated 27.03.2026 and submitted that this Court has determined the additional compensation of Rs.228.25 per sq mtr i.e. in total compensation of Rs.308.25 for Jirayat land and in an acquisition made for same irrigation scheme i.e. Sujlam Suflam extension for a Village Ratanpur and adjoining village to village Vatrakghad.

4.2 He would further submit that acquisition was made almost in the same time period. He would further submit that, in the present case, Notification under Section 4 was issued on 06.05.2005 as against Notification under Section 4 of the Act published in acquisition for land at village Ratanpur on 26.09.2004. Therefore, he would submit that precisely Notification under Section 4 of the Act, in the present case, was published 07 months 12 days later to the Notification under Section 4 of the Act, issued for acquisition of the lands at Village:Ratanpur and thereby as per prevailing settled practice, present appellants are entitled to 10% higher compensation than the fixed by the Court in First Appeal No.1057 of 2021 and allied matters.

4.3 He further submits that, this appeal is filed against the common judgment and award dated 11.11.2020 passed in LAR No.123 of 2017 to 141 of 2017 [Old LAR Nos.941 of 2010 to 959 of 2010 @ Modasa], treating Main LAR No.131 of 2017 passed by the Reference Court i.e. learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Bayad, Dist.Arvalli, and this Court in the group of appeals directed against the said common judgment and award, vide order dated 10.04.2026 passed in First Appeal Nos.3885 of 2024 and allied matters allowed those appeals and granted additional compensation of Rs.117/- per sq mtr. In light of these submissions, learned advocate would submit to allow this appeal.

5. Ms.Hemali Soni, learned AGP could not point any different fact situation and submits that Ratanpur and Vatrakgadh are adjoining village and their boundary touches with each other as well as acquisition made for the same public purpose of irrigation scheme mainly Sujlam Suflam. Upon above submission, she would submit to pass appropriate order.

6. Perusing the judgment and order passed by this Court in First Appeal No.1057 of 2021, it appears that this Court has referred to the judgment passed in