RAMESHBHAI AMBALAL PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners herein are the owners of the lands Survey No. 657 (Block No. 1229) and Survey No. 658/4/a (Block No. 1230) of village Shertha, Taluka Kalol, District Gandhinagar. It is the claim of the petitioners that in the year 1999, they had purchased the above referred two pieces of lands from their erstwhile owners. At that time, the land of Survey No. 657 admeasured 1 Hector, 86 Are, 70 Sq. mtrs. and land of Survey No. 658/a/4 admeasured 0 Hector, 24 Are, 97 Sq. mtrs. The O. N. G. C. acquired 60 sq. mtrs. out of land survey no. 658/a/4 leaving 24 Are 37 sq. mtrs. of land. Since then, under the instructions of the State Government, respondent No. 6 Ahmedabad Mehsana Toll Company Limited had taken over the work of road widening. In the process, some of the lands of the aforesaid Survey Nos. 657 and 658/a/4 have also been utilized without the permission of the petitioners and without following due process of law. In other words, the State Government has usurped part of the lands of the petitioners for the purpose of road widening. The petitioners have, therefore, prayed that the State Government be directed to initiate acquisition proceedings in respect of the pieces of land usurped for road widening and pay compensation to the petitioners. In support of this claim, the petitioners have relied upon the copies of the Village Form 7 and 12 which indicate the area of 18670 sq. mtrs. of land Survey No. 657 and 2437 sq. mtrs. of land Survey No. 658/a/4 and upon Durasti Patrak where also the area has been mentioned to be 18670 sq. mtrs. and 2437 sq. mtrs. as aforesaid. The petitioners have also relied upon the report submitted by the District Inspector of Land Records. According to the petitioners, on actual measurement made the land Survey No. 657 in occupation of the petitioners is 11177 sq. mtrs. which ought to be 18670 sq. mtrs. Similarly, the actual measurement of the lands Survey No. 658/a/4 in possession of the petitioners is 431 sq. mtrs. which ought to be 2437 sq. mtrs.

(2.) LEARNED advocate Mr. Vakil has appeared for the petitioners. Relying upon the aforesaid documents, he has vehemently submitted that out of the lands Survey No. 657, the respondent no. 6 company has usurped the land admeasuring 7492 sq. mtrs. for road widening. Similarly, the land admeasuring 2006 sq. mtrs. has been usurped from the land survey No. 658/a/4. He has submitted that the documents on record prove beyond doubt that the lands to the aforesaid extent has been lost to the road widening. The petitioners are, therefore, entitled to compensation as may be determined under the Land Acquisition Act.

(3.) THE petition is contested by the State Government. It is the claim of the State Government that earlier in the year 1956, the existing Ahmedabad Kalol Mehsana Road was widened to 15 meters road on each side. At that time, parts of the aforesaid lands Survey Nos. 657 and 658/a/4 to the extent of 7386 sq. mtrs. and 2323 sq. mtrs. respectively were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act from the then owners of the land. The owners of the land were paid compensation. Since then, in the year 1971 once again the said road was proposed to be widened to 30 meters on each side. More land was required for the said road widening. Accordingly, acquisition proceedings had been commenced. The lands of the aforesaid Survey Nos. 657 and 658/a/4 to the extent of 7254 sq. mtrs. and 2021 sq. mtrs. respectively was acquired. Thus, for the purpose of road widening, a total of 14640 sq. mtrs. of land has been acquired from the land Survey No. 657 and 4344 sq. mtrs. has been acquired from the land Survey No. 658. In support of the statement, the State Government has produced copy of the awards passed in the years 1956 and 1971. The reference to the area 18670 sq. mtrs. of land Survey No. 657 and 2437 sq. mtrs. of land Survey No. 658 mentioned in the Durasti Patrak has been explained by Ms. Rawal. She has submitted that after the 1956 acquisition of lands, the necessary entries were not entered in the revenue record. Consequently, the records of the Land Record Office had also not been modified.