KHIMANAND DEVANAND Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) OUT of this group of petitions, SCA No.9599 of 2008 and SCA Nos.12690 to 12694 of 2008 were disposed by common oral judgment dated 20.01.2010 by Division Bench of this Court, with the observations that the award validly made in favour of the petitioners under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act") could not lapse for want of communication to the land owner and the award having been declared within the period of limitation, the petitions were dismissed in limine. Thereafter, some petitioners had preferred Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11901 of 2010 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein permission to file special leave petition was granted, delay was condoned and the petitions were disposed as withdrawn as the parties intended to approach this Court by way of review. Pursuant to that order dated 30.4.2010, an application for review, being MCA No.2252 of 2010, was preferred and decided by common oral order dated 05.10.2010, with the observations as under:

(2.) ALTHOUGH number of petitioners have joined in different petitions and made different and separate averments and allegations in their petitions with inconsistent prayers, basic facts about which there is no controversy are that, by notification dated 22.01.1999 under section 4 of the Act, total 409 parcels of land were sought to be acquired for the public purpose of development of Poshitra Port Area. Thereafter, declarations under section 6 of the Act were published on 29.04 1999 and 15.11.1999 ; and notices under section 9 were issued on 30.04.1999 and 24.3.2000. Then, 10 awards in LAQ Case Nos.2 of 1997 to 11 of 1997 were made on 16.04.2001 and 7 awards in LAQ Case Nos.6 of 1998 to 12 of 1998 were made on 07.08.2001. Out of total 409 land owners affected by acquisition, total 155 land owners have preferred the present petitions, after receipt of notices dated 21.02.2008, 11.03.2008 and 03.04.2008 under section 12 of the Act. 15 petitioners are stated to have received compensation due under the awards and preferred references under section 18 of the Act; whereas 140 petitioners have not received or accepted the amount of compensation under the respective award. It is, however, the case of all the petitioners that possession of the lands in question has never been taken over from them and in fact, by virtue of order dated 28.12.2010 herein, the respondents were restrained from taking any action pursuant to the award or disturbing possession of the petitioners. According to the order dated 05.04.2011, learned counsel appearing on both sides sought time to place before the Court relevant facts, preferably in a tabular form, so as to ascertain presence or absence of each petitioner at the time of making of the award as well as the date of service of notice upon the petitioners under section 12 of the Act. Learned counsel for the respondents had also proposed to state on oath the facts with necessary particulars about the amount and the date of deposit of the amount of compensation in terms of section 31 of the Act.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, the awards made under section 11 of the Act were never declared or communicated to the petitioners and straightaway notices under section 12 (2) were issued in the year 2008. On the other hand, since possession of the lands also remained with the petitioners, applications for reference under section 18 of the Act were also made in the year 2008, when notices under section 12 (2) were served upon the petitioners and possession was sought to be taken over. Some 71 agriculturists, with their signatures or thumb impressions, made representation dated 26.05.2008 to respondent No.2, Gujarat Maritime Board (GMB), to protest against payment of compensation in 2008 at the market rates prevailing in the year 1998 and expressed the apprehension that GMB was likely to sell away the lands to private parties at much higher rates. In its reply dated 25.06.208, GMB stated that the amounts of compensation were being paid with interest and the acquired lands were proposed to be given away on long term lease to developers for development of Poshitra Port. By filing a common affidavit of Mr.H.N.Solanki, Superintending Engineer of GMB, it is further stated that in LAQ Case Nos. 2 of 1997 to 11 of 1997, the award under section 11 was passed on 16.04.2001 and panch rojkam for taking possession of the land was made on 18.04.2001 and the award was posted/published on the village square, in the offices of Mamlatdar, Port Officer and Collector. Similarly, in LAQ Case Nos.6 to 12 of 1998, the award under section 11 was passed on 07.08.2001 and panch rojkam was carried out on 10.08.2001. It is averred by him that more than 25% of the land owners have accepted compensation and possession of their lands have already been taken. It is denied that the petitioners had no knowledge of the award. It is contended by him that: