Gujarat High Court
Shantiben Ambubhai Vanol Wife Of … vs State Of Gujarat on 18 December, 2024
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17224 of 2018
==================================================
SHANTIBEN AMBUBHAI VANOL WIFE OF AMBUBHAI POOJABHAI
VANOL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==================================================
Appearance:
MR SK PATEL(654) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS. HETAL PATE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 18/12/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
[1] Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and
perused the record.
[2] This is a wholly misconceived petition filed in the year
2018 seeking for quashing and setting aside of the proceedings
for determination of compensation for the land in question;
issuing further direction to the respondents to initiate fresh
compensation proceedings and to complete the same by
awarding fair compensation for the land in question.
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
[3] The petitioner herein claims to be the widow of the
deceased landholder. It is sought to be submitted in the writ
petition that land bearing Survey No.635 admeasuring 5862 sq.
mtrs. was originally owned by the husband of the petitioner
herein namely, Ambubhai Poojabhai Vanol and the name of the
husband of the petitioner was recorded in village Form No.7/12
appended as Annexure-A to the writ petition.
[4] In the year 2001, the husband of the petitioner applied for
conversion of the land in question from agriculture to non
agriculture use for residential purposes and permission was
duly granted on 28.09.2001. The copy of order dated
28.09.2001 for grant of N.A. permission is appended as
Annexure-B to the writ petition.
[5] It is further submitted that though the order has been
passed to convert the land in question for non agriculture use
and an intimation was given to Talati cum mantri of village
panchayat Vadgam to mutate the relevant revenue entry in
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
respect of N.A. permission, but no such entry was made in the
revenue records. The owner of the land in question namely,
husband of the petition had died some time in the year 2006
leaving the petitioner and son namely, Suresh Ambubhai as his
legal heirs. The acquisition proceedings for the acquisition of
the land in question had been initiated with the publication of
the notification under Section 4 dated 29.12.2009 and Section 6
was issued on 10.01.2011. It is further stated in paragraph 4.9
of the writ petition that from the documents collected by the
petitioner, it transpired that Section 9 notice was issued on
01.01.2012 in the name of the husband of the petitioner, a dead
person.
[6] Be that as it may, the award under Section 11 was passed
declaring compensation of the land in question. The submission
is that no hearing was afforded to the petitioner as no notice
was validly issued. Section 12 notice came to be issued on
22.04.2013, again in the name of a dead person which had
returned with the endorsement “the person had expired”. The
copy of Section 12 notice along with R.P.A.D. slip is appended
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
as Annexure-F (Colly.) to the writ petition. The petitioner
would, thus, submit that from the documents collected by her, it
is evident that no notice or inquiry whatsoever has been
conducted prior to the determination of compensation.
[7] It is further stated that son of the petitioner had
approached an advocate to file a reference application under
Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter
referred as to “the Act, 1894) and the reference application is
appended as Annexure-G. From the record of the reference
proceedings, it revealed that the consent term was prepared in
the form of settlement for awarding additional compensation of
Rs.16.90/- and the same was placed before the Expert
Committee constituted by the State Government for the purpose
of settlement of claim of compensation under the Act, 1894.
Based on the decision in the meeting of the Expert Committee
held on 27.08.2016, under the signature of the son of the
petitioner and his advocate, reference proceedings were
concluded, though the case of son of the petitioner is that he
was not present when such proceedings were taken out before
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
the Expert Committee and his signatures were taken by the
advocate for filing the reference proceedings. The petitioner,
thus, states that from the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dhangadara in Reference Case
No.16 of 2014 filed by the son of the petitioner, it appears that
the reference application was partly allowed on the basis of the
consent terms dated 27.08.2016 placed before the Expert
Committee, whereby additional compensation of Rs.16.90/- was
awarded over and above the compensation awarded by the Land
Acquisition Officer under the award passed under Section 11.
[8] With these averments, it is sought to be submitted that
from the order passed by the reference court dated 23.07.2018,
it is evident that the reference court has rejected the claim of
compensation at the rate of Rs.300/- demanded by the son of the
petitioner because of the consent term dated 27.08.2016.
Further, on the ground that the applicant therein had
suppressed the facts of consent term before the reference court.
[9] With these averments, in various paragraphs of the writ
petition, it is further sought to be submitted that the consent
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
term dated 27.08.2016 was not signed by the son of the
petitioner and present is the case where just compensation has
not been awarded for the land in question.
[10] Noticing the above facts stated in the writ petition, suffice
is to record that with the declaration of the award under Section
11 of the Act, 1894, the acquisition proceedings had been
brought to its logical end. From the averments made in the writ
petition, extracted hereinbefore, it is evident that the notices
under Sections 9 and 12 were issued by the competent authority
at the relevant point of time. The statement made in the writ
petition that the petitioner came to know about the notice under
Section 9 form the documents collected by her is vague,
inasmuch as, the notice under Section 9 is issued by the
Collector in the form of public notice which is to be given at
convenient places on or near the land, which is proposed to be
taken, intimating the intention of the State Government to take
possession of the land, calling upon all persons interested in
such land to make a claim for compensation. The public notice
as per Section 9 of the Act, 1894 was issued on 01.01.2018. The
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
fact that in the notice the name of the husband of the petitioner
was recorded who had died by the said time would not be
relevant, inasmuch as, it was open for the petitioner to lay her
claim of being a person interested when the notice under
Section 9 was published in the locality. There is nothing on
record nor it can be accepted that the petitioner was not aware
of the acquisition proceedings or making of the award.
[11] Moreover, it is an admission on the part of the petitioner
that the son of the petitioner filed proceedings under Section 18
by moving application for reference to challenge the award on
merits. The said proceeding has also been brought to its logical
end by a competent court of law by the order dated 23.07.2018.
Once the proceedings for determination of compensation have
been brought to its logical conclusion with the making of the
award and decision on the reference application, the present
petition seeking for quashing and setting aside of the said
proceedings and to make a fresh determination is nothing but
an abuse of the process of the Court.
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17224/2018 ORDER DATED: 18/12/2024
undefined
[12] The submission made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the fact of making of reference by the son of the
petitioner and the order passed by the reference court in the
said proceedings would not bind the petitioner is absolutely
misconceived, for the simple reason that the petitioner herself
has never laid any claim before the competent authority or raise
any dispute with regard to the determination of the
compensation. It was not open for the petitioner to approach
this Court straightaway by filing a writ petition seeking for
quashing of the proceedings which had been conducted by
competent court of law.
[13] The present petition is, accordingly dismissed, being
misconceived.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.)
(PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.)
DHARMENDRA KUMAR
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by DHARMENDRA KUMAR(HC01071) on Tue Dec 24 2024 Downloaded on : Tue Dec 24 21:22:33 IST 2024