Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1167 (GUJ)

Rupsangbhai Virambhai v. State of Gujarat

2014-12-18

C.L.SONI, JAYANT PATEL

body2014
JUDGMENT : Jayant Patel, J. Rule. Mr. Rakesh Patel, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule for respondents No.1, 2 and 4. Mr.Karia, learned Counsel appears for respondent No.3. 2. As such, the facts are not in dispute, inasmuch as the acquisition of the land, the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the Reference made to the District Court for additional compensation, the judgment of this Court in First Appeal and also the factum of dismissal of SLP by the Apex Court. It is an undisputed position that the ultimate compensation held and found to be payable is at L 20/- per sq. mtr., being additional compensation and the interest from the date of taking over of the possession until the amount is paid or deposited. The judgment of this Court in First Appeal Nos. 2671 of 2006 to 2681 of 2006 dated 5.7.2007 in the case of Malabhai Harjibhai v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Anr., is produced at Annexure-A. 3. When the Apex Court has already confirmed the order passed by this Court and has not interfered with the compensation fixed and finalised by this Court, there is no reason for the acquisition authority to withhold the amount of compensation. 4. The grievance on the part of the petitioner is that in spite of the aforesaid legal position and the compensation finalised by all Courts, the actual payment has not been made. 5. Whereas, Mr.Patel, learned AGP submitted that since some matters were, at the relevant point of time, pending in the Supreme Court, the decision was taken to prefer appeal before this Court, but after the Hon'ble Apex Court has dismissed the SLP against the judgment of this Court, Government may not pursue the implementation of the decision to prefer appeal and he submitted that the payment may be required to be made, but some additional time may be required for calculation and necessary arrangements. 6. It is hardly required to be stated that in land acquisition matter, when the compensation is fixed and finalised and such amount of compensation is not upset by any higher forum known to law, the State or its officers, may be of its own or at the instance of the acquiring body, is required to pay the compensation to the persons, whose lands or properties are acquired. 7. 7. Hence, we direct that the respondents shall calculate the amount of compensation payable and shall make the payment within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. 8. We may record that we are inclined to issue the direction in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances that there is no dispute raised for the quantum of liability to pay compensation as fixed and finalised by this Court, which is not upset by the Apex Court and there are no issues, which may arise to be considered in the execution proceedings. However, it is observed that if there is any dispute in respect of entitlement of any of the claimants for their identity or succession, it would be open to the respondents to deposit the amount in the Reference Court concerned and the Reference Court, after verifying the necessary details shall be at liberty to disburse the amount to the persons entitled for compensation. 9. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted. Petition Allowed.