PATEL BALKRISHNA CHHOTALAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since points to be decided in both these petitions are the same and they arise from the same acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] and reliefs claimed in these petitions are against the same respondents, both these petitions are heard together and now they are being disposed of by this common CAV Judgment, which will govern both these petitions.

(2.) The short facts are as under :-

(3.) So far the facts of Special Civil Application No. 14094 of 2003 are concerned, they are more or less similar. According to these petitioners, they were given permission dated 6th January, 1999 to put up construction of survey nos. 3865, 3866, 3891 and 3892 and in accordance with the said permission, now two storeyed building incurring heavy expenditure have been put up. It is their say that shortly thereafter the aforesaid resolution i.e. resolution of 12th March, 1999 of respondent no. 3 Municipality being resolution no. 458 for widening the road in question from 28 ft. to 40 ft. was passed and it was resolved that earlier resolution no. 290 dated 4th January, 1960 to be implemented. Against the said resolution, the petitioners preferred Special Civil Application No. 8692 of 1999 before this Court which according to them, is pending. However, the Court made it clear that pendency of this petition would not preclude the State Government from initiating proceedings under the Act for acquisition of the land. It is further stated that respondent no. 2 issued notification on 28th May, 2002 under section 4 of the Act which was published in the Official Gazette on 12th June, 2002 and Gujarat Samachar, a local daily in vernacular language on 30th June, 2002. It was also published in another another daily called 'Sandesh' on 2nd July, 2002. Pursuant to the publication of notification the petitioners filed their objections on 28th July, 2002, 27th August, 2002, 24th February, 2003 and 21st July, 2003. Subsequently on 1st August, 2003 declaration under section 6 of the Act was published wherein it was declared that the land in question was needed for public purpose, namely widening of the road running between Krishna Cinema and Bhamariya Nala in Mehsana town. In view of the same, the petitioners have now approached this Court praying for quashing the proceedings.