MUKESHBHAI NATHABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, petitioner has sought for direction to the second respondent to decide the application dtd. 24/9/2014 filed under Sec. 28 A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on account of in-action on the part of the second respondent, in not considering the said application.

(2.) We have heard the arguments of Mr. K.M. Sheth, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Ms. Hetal G. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the State. Perused the records. It is an undisputed fact that the land of petitioner bearing Block/Survey No. 186 admeasuring 1431 sq.mtrs., situated in Village Medra, Taluka & District Gandhinagar, having been acquired during 2000 for Narmada Project after issuance of Notification under Ss. 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). It also resulted in an award being passed on 19/8/2022. However, the writ applicant did not challenge the said award or seek for enhancement of the compensation. Similarly placed persons sought for reference under Sec. 18 of the Act by filing an application before the jurisdictional Reference Court which was numbered as L.A.R. Case No. 1043 of 2009 and other connected matters. The reference court allowed the application in part by judgment and award dtd. 6/9/2014. Immediately i.e. on 24/9/2014, the writ applicant filed an application under Sec. 28A of the Act (Annexure-A) before the second respondent seeking for similar compensation being awarded. The said application was not considered. However, by communication dtd. 15/10/2014, petitioner was called upon to the furnish copy of the judgment dtd. 3/8/2014 passed in L.A.R. Case Nos. 1043 of 2009 to 1044 of 2009, which was duly furnished on 5/2/2015. Thereafter, the application filed under Sec. 28A of the Act was never taken up for consideration. In fact, one of the communication addressed to the writ applicants dtd. 17/6/2015 (Annexure-D), would clearly indicate that they have received the award, on the basis on which the writ applicants were seeking compensation, yet the said application was not adjudicated and disposed of. Even legal notice is issued to the respondent has gone unanswered. Repeated requests, prayers and visits by the petitioner to the office of the second respondent seems to have not yielded any result, as is evident from the correspondence placed on record. Ultimately, left with no other option, petitioner got issued a legal notice on 17/8/2019 (Annexure-F), calling upon the second respondent to take immediate steps to pass an award. This was followed by another legal notice by way of reminder dtd. 4/6/2022. This also did not receive response from the second respondent. Hence, left with no other option, petitioner has approached this Court invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) The State being alive of such instances where the officials do not take cognizance of the applications filed and allow the said applications to languish for months and years, which results in enormous financial drain on the State, thought fit to issue suitable directions to the authorities and as such, Circular dtd. 10/3/1997 came to be issued, which was in the public interest and to ensure that State exchequer would not be made to expend the amount for in-action on the part of its officials. We are of the considered view, it would be necessary to refer to the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench rendered in Patel Kantilal Vitthaldas v. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (1) GLR 49, where-under, effect of aforesaid Circular came to be considered and it came to be held as under :-