RAJNIKANT JERAMBHAI PATEL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner original land owner has prayed for the following relief:

(2.) That the land in question originally owned by the petitioner came to be acquired by the ONGC under the provision of Petroleum and Minerals, Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). Thus, ONGC acquired the permanent right of user in the year 1964 and since then ONGC was using the right of user over the land of the petitioner for more than 50 years by laying pipeline. It appears that thereafter, ONGC has entered into the agreement with the GAIL (INDIA) Limited and therefore, instead of ONGC, now GAIL is required to exercise the rights available under the Act, more particularly, right of user in the land in question. Therefore, GAIL has now issued impugned notice under Section 8 of the Act, 1962 inter alia informing the petitioner that on 5.6.2007 or any time thereafter, the work of repairing/replacing pipeline will start. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application for the aforesaid relief, more particularly challenging the impugned notice dated 24.5.2017 issued by the GAIL (INDIA) Limited.

(3.) Shri J A Adeshra, learned advocate for the petitioner has vehemently submitted that right of user with respect to land in question was acquired by the ONGC and therefore, ONGC could have transferred such right of user in favour of third party GAIL (INDIA) Limited. It is submitted that at present now GAIL (INDIA) Limited is laying pipeline. It is submitted that unless and until GAIL (INDIA) Limited has acquired ROU in the land in question for laying pipeline in Ankleshwar Baroda Gas Pipeline (ABGL) Project and unless and until the amount of compensation under Section 10(1) and 10(4) of the Act, 1962 is paid to the land owners, GAIL (INDIA) Ltd has no right or authority in law to proceed with the work of laying pipeline in ABGL Project. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that as such GAIL (INDIA) Limited who has issued impugned notice has never acquired right of user under the Act, 1962, in respect of the land in question. It is submitted that therefore, impugned notice under Section 8 of the Act is wholly without jurisdiction, illegal and arbitrary which deserves to be quashed and set aside. 3.1. It is submitted by Shri Adeshra, learned advocate for the petitioner that as the GAIL is laying down new pipeline and it is case of repair and therefore, Section 8 of the Act, 1962 shall be applicable. Making above submissions, it is requested to allow/admit the present petition.