Temporary rental compensation for land acquired for drilling purposes should be determined by applying 15% of the market value of the land, ensuring parity between the compensation provided to private landowners and the rates charged by the Government for its own land.

ORDER

1. Present First Appeal is left out matter of the group of First Appeal No.1139 of 2020 and allied matters.

2. This Court in First Appeal No.1139 of 2020 and allied matters, vide CAV judgment dated 6.5.2026 has been pleased to dismiss the First Appeals by making following observations:-

22. The first contention raised by learned advocate Ms. Thaker is that the Coordinate Bench of this Court in First Appeal No.145 of 2021 and other allied matter determined the temporary rental compensation at Rs.3.60 per sq mtr relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Shanahi Nathaji Dabhi (supra). However, the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP No.3681 of 2026 has stayed implementation of said judgment. Moreover, the judgment in case of Shanahi Nathaji Dabhi (supra) is in regards to village Pethapur, Shertha and Adalaj etc., whereas in the present matters, the land of village Dingucha is temporarily acquired. The distance of both the lands is 25 – 30 km except village Saij. Therefore, there is no applicability of the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, as exemplar to determine the temporary rental compensation.

23. As far as judgment of State of Maharashtra v. Maimuma Banu , (2003) 7 SCC 448 is concerned, it was a case where 6% interest is granted on rent, whereby the land was possessed prior to issuance of notification u/s 4 of the Act. The same would not apply to the facts of the present case.

24. As far as submission of non-application of GR dated 6.7.2015 is concerned, whereby the Government itself charged 15% of the market value as rent for its own land given to the ONGC for drilling purpose is concerned. Learned advocate Mr. Raiyani right pointed out that it is not a question of applying GR dated 6.7.2015, but it is a case of applying method to determine the temporary rental value to award the compensation. The method can be adopted and adoption of such method per se cannot be said that resolution has been applied retrospectively. The learned Reference Court applied the method of charging 15% of the market value of land to determine rental value adopted by the State Government through its resolution dated 6.7.2015 for the land which was given to the ONGC for temporary drilling and found out the market price of the land which was temporarily acquired for the relevant time period and granted 15% thereon as compensation.

25. It is also the case of the ONGC that no exemplar can be applied on the temporary acquisition. According to this Court, the learned Reference Court has rightly adopted the GR dated 6.7.2015 to apply the methodology of application of 15% of the market value to determine the temporary compensation for temporary acquisition. There cannot be any different and distinct valuation, if the Government is entitled to get 15% of the market value of the land when the Government itself is giving its land to the ONGC for drilling in line of same methodology. Ordinary person, whose lands are acquired for temporary acquisition for drilling purpose, should also be given 15% of the market valuation of the land of that year in which it has been temporarily acquired. Thus, this Court finds no error in the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court. Accordingly, all the First Appeals deserve no consideration and are required to be dismissed.”

3. The aforesaid observations and findings are equally applicable to the facts of the present case since all the matters are of the same group.

4. Resultantly, First Appeal sans merit and stands dismissed accordingly.

5. Registry is directed to return back the R & P, if any, to the concerned Co