Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10993/2010 4/ 7 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10993 of 2010
To
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10995 of 2010
=========================================================
BALVANTBHAI
GOVANBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
COMPETENT
AUTHORITY & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
ARPIT A KAPADIA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 14/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned Advocate Mr. Arpit A. Kapadia for petitioners and learned
AGP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for respondent State Authority.
In
this case, initially, District Collector, Surat passed order on 27th
July, 2009 with a direction to respondent authority to work out
compensation while allowing partly appeal preferred by petitioner
and on that basis, whatever compensation is required to be paid by
respondent, same is to be paid by respondent to petitioner.
Petitioner has not received any compensation from respondent
authority so far and order passed by District Collector, Surat dated
27th July, 2009 is not implemented in favour of
petitioner by respondent authority and, therefore, this court was
moved by petitioner by filing Special Civil Application NO. 12984 of
2009 wherein following order is passed by this Court on 17th
December, 2009:
1. By
way of this petition, the petitioner, prayed as under:
[a] to
take action on the representation dated 1.8.2009 and 7.9.2009
(Annexure D and E ) made by the petitioner to the
respondent no.2 and to release compensation awarded by the District
Collector, Surat vide his judgment and order dated 27.7.2009 in
Appeal No. 8/2007.
2.
Respondent no.1 -the Government of Gujarat, Energy &
Petrochemicals Department, Gandhinagar vide notification dated
16.3.2006 issued u/s. 6(1) of the Act declared that right of the
user in the land specified in the Schedule is acquired for laying
the pipelines and further in exercise of power u/s. 6(4) of the
Act, the State Government directs that the rights of the user in the
land shall vests on the date of the publication in the GSPL,
Gadhinagar free from all encumbrances. The petitioner’s land was
also included in the said notification. The petitioner was awarded
Rs. 8,80,720/- as total amount of compensation by the competent
authority GSPL, Gandhinagar. Being aggrieved by the said order the
petitioner preferred an application before the respondent no.5-
District Collector, Surat vide LAQ Appeal No. 8 of 2007 for
additional compensation for the damages to the land and standing
crops/ trees. By order dated 27.7.2009, the District Collector,
Surat directed the respondent no.2 to 4 to pay the expenses
claimed by the petitioner after proper verification. However, though
there were several representation made by the petitioner, no action
on the part of the respondent authorities. Hence, this petition.
3.
From the record it appears that no action what so ever was taken by
the respondent authorities in spite of several representation.
Looking to the peculiar facts of th case I am of the view that ends
of justice will be passed by passing the following order :
(I)
The Respondent no.2 competent authority shall decide the
representation made by the petitioner(Annexure D & E to the
petition) within a period of four weeks from today and thereafter
Respondent no.3 shall make the payment of compensation on furnishing
the security by the petitioner within a period of two weeks.
(II) The
aforesaid directions are subject to the right of Respondent no.3- to
challenge the order of the Collector before this Court and subject
to final outcome of such petition.
4. With
above directions, petition stands disposed of. Direct service is
permitted.
Subsequently,
respondent has challenged very same order dated 27th
July, 2009 passed by District Collector by filing Special Civil
Application No. 2044 of 2010 with Special Civil Application No. 2045
of 2010 to 2047 of 2010 wherein following order is passed by this
Court on 26.2.2010:
1.
By way of this petition the petitioner has prayed to quash and set
aside the impugned order dated 27.7.2009 passed by the District
Collector, Surat in purported exercise under Section 10(2) of the
Gujarat Water and Gas Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of Users in
Land) Act, 2000 and further to stay the operation and implementation
of the impugned order dated 27.7.2009 till the final disposal of
this petition.
2. The
brief facts of the case are as under :-
2.1 By
notification dated 16.3.2006, Government had issued a notification
under Section 6 of the Gujarat Water and Gas Pipeline (Acquisition
of Right of User in Land) Act, 2000 for laying the gas pipelines.
2.2 On
18.1.2007 the competent authority has passed an award for the crop
and tree for the lands of the land owners. The land owners preferred
an application/ appeal under Section 10(2) of the Gujarat Water and
Gas Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2000. By
order dated 27.7.2009 the Collector, Surat, rejected the said
application. Hence this petition.
3. Heard
learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the
documents on record.
4. The
Collector, Surat had disposed of all the appeals mainly on the
ground that the compensation be paid to the land owners by
considering the production of crops and fruits
upto their maximum age. The amount of compensation is calculated by
applying a multiplier of 15 for mangoes. For trees other than the
mango trees, the multiplier applied is 10. Thus the compensation
amount for the trees of Mangoes, Jambudo, Jamfali, Gunda, Setur,
Gorakambli and Ker is calculated and paid to the landowners.
5. However,
what is required to be noted is that the issue involved in the
matter is not a policy matter, but a commercial transaction,
Therefore, the Tribunal is required to record finding on the actual
facts and the disputes between the parties.
6. In
the premises aforesaid the impugned judgment and awards are quashed
and set aside. The matters are remanded to the Tribunal for
consideration afresh as stated hereinabove. The Tribunal shall hear
and dispose of the matters within four months from the date of
receipt of writ of this order.
Thus,
matter was remanded to District Collector, Surat and District
Collector, Surat has passed order on 21st July 2010 and
directed respondents to work out compensation as per earlier order
dated 27th July, 2009 and pay compensation to present
petitioner or person those who are affected because of utilization
of their land by respondents for installing pipelines.
Now,
petitioner is challenging order dated 21st July, 2010
after remanding matter back to District Collector but earlier order
which has been confirmed by District Collector, Surat dated 27th
July, 2009, at that relevant time, this order was not challenged by
petitioner before this court. On the contrary, petition was
preferred by petitioner for compliance of order passed by District
Collector, Surat dated 27th July, 2009, therefore, it is
submitted by learned Advocate Mr. Kapadia for petitioner that even
in order dated 21st July, 2010, compensation has not been
worked out by respondent District Collector, Surat and merely
earlier order dated 27th July 2009 has been confirmed
and, therefore, some suitable directions are required to be issued
to respondent authority.
In
light of this back ground, it is directed to District Collector,
Surat to work out compensation which is available to petitioner in
view of order dated 27th July, 2009 and whatever amount
of compensation is worked out, then, to direct respondent authority
to pay such amount of compensation immediately to petitioner. For
that, necessary exercise is required to be carried out by District
Collector, Surat to work out compensation as per original order
dated 27th July, 2009 and thereafter, to issue necessary
direction to respondent authority, so, whatever compensation is
required to be paid by authority, same can be paid to petitioner
immediately. It is made clear that such exercise as directed by this
court to District Collector, Surat must have tobe completed within
period of two months from date of receiving copy of this order.
In
view of these observations and directions, this petition is disposed
of by this court without expressing any opinion on merits of matter.
D.S.P.
(H.K.
Rathod,J.)
Vyas
Top