Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 662 (GUJ)

Ratubhai Jesangbhai Vanol v. Executive Engineer

2015-07-03

R.P.DHOLARIA, V.M.SAHAI

body2015
JUDGMENT : Vijay Manohar Sahai, J. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Nirav Sanghavi for the petitioner, learned AGP Mr. Chintan Dave appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and learned advocate Ms. Maya Desai appearing for respondent No. 3. 2. Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed award on 9.4.2012 under Section 11(2) of the Land Acquisition Act stating therein that the petitioner has consented to the award. The award has been challenged by the petitioner before this Court stating that he has never consented for the award and there is no documentary evidence available on the record to demonstrate that the petitioner has clearly consented to the award under Section 11(2) of the Act. Affidavit in reply has been filed and it has not been disputed by the respondents that there is no material available on record which can demonstrate that the petitioner has given consent for the award. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the award made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 11(2) of the Act on 9.4.2012 is illegal and cannot bind the petitioner and deserves to be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner. Similar view has been taken by this Court in Shivabhai Vajabhai Vanol v. Executive Engineer & Others decided on 9.1.2015 in Special Civil Application No. 12469 of 2014 wherein at paragraph Nos. 10, 11 and 12, the Court has held as follows: "10. In above such view of the matter, the award passed under Section 11(2) of the Act is required to be quashed and set aside and the respondents are required to be directed to pass fresh award under Section 11(1) of the Act. 11. As observed by us in our above referred order, since the petitioner has not claimed back the possession, quashing of the award under Section 11(2) of the Act would not make the petitioner entitled to get back the possession. In fact, we make it clear that the vesting of the possession of the land with the concerned authorities has become final and the petitioner shall not be entitled to claim any right as regards title and possession of the land in question. 12. In fact, we make it clear that the vesting of the possession of the land with the concerned authorities has become final and the petitioner shall not be entitled to claim any right as regards title and possession of the land in question. 12. For the reasons stated above, the award dated 9.4.2012 at annexure-B, only for the land of the petitioner, shall stand quashed with further direction to the respondent authorities to pass fresh award under Section 11(1) of the Act in respect of the land of the petitioner within three months from the date of receipt of this order after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. The petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent." 3. In view of the aforesaid judgment and for the reasons assigned by us, the award dated 9.4.2012 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 11(2) of the Land Acquisition Act is quashed so far as the petitioner is concerned and the matter is remanded to the Special Land Acquisition Officer for fresh consideration and making award under Section 11(1) of the Act, 1894. Direct service is permitted. Petition allowed.