DHARMENDRASINH RANJITSINH JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondents to pay compensation for acquisition of the lands in question situated in the sim of village Poshitara, Taluka Dwarka, District Jamnagar as per the award dated 16th April, 2001 made in Land Acquisition Case No. 6 of 1997 and connected Land Acquisition Cases.

(2.) THE petitioners' case is that they had purchased the land in question from the predecessors in title who are respondents in the respective petitions by registered sale deeds which were executed between 30th December 1997 and 28th January 1998 and which were also registered with the concerned Sub-Registrar of documents between 3rd January 1998 and 20th February 1998. The grievance of the petitioners is that although the petitioners had purchased the land by registered sale deed and consequently the mutation entries were also made in the revenue record of the Govt. and thereafter the Land Acquisition Officer had also issued notices in the year 1999, the Land Acquisition Officer made the award in favour of the original owners i. e. the predecessors in title of the petitioners, depriving the petitioners of their constitutional right to receive the compensation for the lands acquired from the petitioners.

(3.) IN the affidavit in reply filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gujarat Maritime Board, it is admitted that the petitioners' names were entered in the village form Nos. 7 and 12 by mutation of entries on the basis of the sale deeds and the Deputy Collector, Jamkhambhalia had also issued notices to all the concerned persons including the petitioners on 30th April 1999. However, it is still stated that after issuance of notices by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Gujarat Maritime Board, no objections were received and therefore the award was made in favour of the original land owners whose names were reflected in the revenue record. It is also stated that after the award is passed, the Collector cannot make correction in the award except in case of clerical or arithmetical error. Therefore, the Collector or the Special Land Acquisition Officer has no power to substantially change the award. The petitioners have not got their rights decided by the civil Court against the concerned persons who sold the land to the petitioners and whose names appear in the award; and that in absence of any decision of the competent Court regarding rights of the party, compensation cannot be disbursed in favour of the petitioners. It is also stated that the lands were purchased after the commencement of the acquisition proceedings.