JIVABHAI MALUBHAI DODIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner as such prayed for the following reliefs.

(2.) The facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in nutshell are as under: 2. 1 That the land of the petitioner herein came to be acquired along with other land owners for the public purpose and for Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as "SSNNL"). That a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "Act") was issued on 06.12.2010 and notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued and published on 22.02.2011. That thereafter the land owners including the petitioner herein were offered the compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,97,000/- per hectare so that if the agriculturist/land owners are agreeable, in that case, a consent award can be passed. It appears that all other land owners agreed to accept the aforesaid compensation and also entered into the relevant agreements and therefore, so far as other land owners are concerned, they were paid the compensation accordingly as agreed and consent awards came to be passed. It appears that however the petitioner was agreeable to the same but with certain conditions and therefore, he stated that he will be agreeable to accept the aforesaid amount provided his other conditions are satisfied. However, thereafter, the talks did materialise and consequently the petitioner was agreeable for the consent award and was agreeable to accept the compensation offered and therefore, subsequently a regular award under Section 11(1) of the Act came to be declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs. 79,008/- per hectare and looking to the area of the land acquired the petitioner-original land owner was held entitled to get Rs. 25,334/- towards compensation. Thus, a regular award came to be passed under Section 11(1) of the Act on 13.12.2013. That thereafter the Special Land Acquisition Officer and SSNNL made efforts to pay the compensation to the petitioner, however the petitioner did accept the same and therefore, ultimately the SSNNL deposited the said amount with the Government/Treasury in the month of April 2015. It appears that thereafter beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Section 18 of the Act, the petitioner submitted the application under Section 18 of the Act for reference to the District Court on 28.06.2016. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as the same was beyond the period of limitation prescribed under Section 18 of the Act, the same was accepted by the District Court, Surendranagar. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for of the aforesaid reliefs.

(3.) Shri Valmik Vyas, learned Advocate appearing for Shri A.J. Yagnik, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that when the others were paid the compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,97,000/- per hectare. The petitioner being similarly situated land owner whose land has been acquired along with other land owners, the petitioner is also required to be paid the same compensation. It is submitted that however while passing the award under Section 11(1) of the Act, the petitioner has been offered to pay the compensation at the rate of Rs. 79,008/- per hectare. It is submitted that the action of the respondent in offering to pay the compensation to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 79,008/- per hectare is discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. 1 It is further submitted by Shri Vyas, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that as such in the year 2012 when the other land owners were offered the compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,97,000/- per hectare, the petitioner was also agreeable to the same, however with certain conditions. It is submitted that even the conditions which were suggested by the petitioner were under consideration by the appropriate Authority also. It is submitted that therefore, however as the talks did materialize and therefore, when the petitioner was agreeable to accept the amount of compensation, which was paid to others, the petitioner is also required to be paid the compensation for the land acquired at par with other land owners whose lands are also acquired along with the petitioner's land. Making above submissions and it is requested to admit/allow the present petition.