JUDGMENT : Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. 1. These petitions arise in similar background. All the petitioners are owners of agriculture lands situated in village Mansa and nearby villages. Their lands have been occupied by ONGC since several years for the purpose of oil exploration and extraction under different agreements/understandings. The land owners receive rent from ONGC. These petitioners, however, contend that the ONGC cannot occupy their lands indefinitely without acquisition. 2. Necessary facts may be noted from Special Civil Application No. 7993 of 2015. Different petitioners own different parcels of land in Mansa which the ONGC required for oil exploration. The ONGC, therefore, entered into an agreement dated 22.08.2007 titled as "Possession Receipt and Agreement". Under such agreement, the land owners handed over possession of the lands to ONGC. The agreement provided that the ONGC would enjoy the possession and continue to remain in possession until land acquisition proceedings of the land under the Land Acquisition Act are completed or till ONGC itself returns the land back to the owners. It was further provided that the rent shall be determined through the competent Revenue Officer and the rent for the first three years shall be paid through such Officer, after which, ONGC would directly pay the rent to the land owners. Clause 5 of the agreement provided that the ONGC would pay rent at the rate of Rs. 7.50 per sq.mtrs or Rs. 750/- per Are per annum. It was, further provided that in the beginning of the first three years, if oil is found and the extraction is likely to be successful for a long period, the land would be acquired and the ONGC would pay regular rent every year until completion of the proceedings for acquisition of the land on permanent basis. 3. Case of the petitioners is that, since 2007, the ONGC is occupying such lands by paying a meager amount of rent without acquiring the same. According to the petitioners, the ONGC should either acquire the land permanently, if so required or, vacate the same and handover possession to the petitioners but, at any rate, cannot for indefinite period enjoy the use and occupation of the land by paying a meager amount of rent. 4. The petitioners further point out that the ONGC did request the State authorities to commence the acquisition proceedings and, in pursuance of the same, entered into an agreement. 4. The petitioners further point out that the ONGC did request the State authorities to commence the acquisition proceedings and, in pursuance of the same, entered into an agreement. As per such agreement ONGC would deposit with the Government, a portion of the probable compensation for the lands in question, upon which, the Government would proceed to acquire the land for and on behalf of the ONGC. However, the ONGC, later on, sought to be back out from such commitment. Petitioners would bring to our notice a letter dated 23.02.2015 written by the Government to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, in which, referring to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, required the Special Land Acquisition Officer to take further steps after the ONGC deposited the agreed amount. Counsel for the petitioners pointed out that, now, the ONGC is refusing to deposit such amount and thus, the entire acquisition proceedings are in jeopardy. 5. Learned counsel Mr. Saurabh Soparkar vehemently contended that, the ONGC cannot occupy the lands of the petitioners indefinitely by paying a meager amount of rent. The ONGC could either acquire the land or would have to return the possession of the land to the petitioners and, at any rate, in the interregnum, the ONGC must pay reasonable rent. He pointed out that the land value, even according to the Government rates, runs into crores of rupees and such lands are occupied by ONGC by paying rent, which is extremely low. Counsel further submitted that the ONGC must be held to the terms of the agreement and should be directed to deposit the money with the Government as per the said agreement dated 18.06.2014. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Mihir Thakore for ONGC submitted that, the rent, which was initially fixed at Rs. 7.50 per sq.mtrs per annum in case of land owners of Special Civil Application No. 7993 of 2015 is revised from time to time. In the year 2010, the rent was increased to Rs. 10/- per sq.mtr per annum, in 2013 it was increased to Rs. 13/- per sq.mtr per annum and w.e.f. 01.10.2014, it is increased to Rs. 18/- per sq.mtr per annum. In the year 2010, the rent was increased to Rs. 10/- per sq.mtr per annum, in 2013 it was increased to Rs. 13/- per sq.mtr per annum and w.e.f. 01.10.2014, it is increased to Rs. 18/- per sq.mtr per annum. He further submitted that the agreement dated 18.06.2014 between ONGC and the Government was executed by both sides in sheer ignorance of the fact that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been repealed and substituted by Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('the Act of 2013' for short). No liability to deposit any amount with the State Government, therefore, has arisen at this stage. 7. He, however, clarified that the ONGC is committed to acquiring the land as per the present legislation and would abide by all terms and conditions contained in the Act of 2013 concerning deposit and payment of compensation. He, however, submitted that till the acquisition proceedings proceed till the stage of Section 19 of the Act of 2013, the ONGC would even have no liability to deposit any amount with the Government. 8. Learned Government Pleader Ms. Manisha L. Shah submitted that the ONGC must deposit with the State Government the amount, as agreed under the agreement dated 18.06.2014. She, however, clarified that the State has already issued notification on or around 18.01.2016 under Section 4 of the Act of 2013 declaring its intention to acquire the lands in question for public purpose specified therein. The notification also declares the decision of the Government to carry out a Social Impact Assessment study of the affected area. The time limit for submission of final report of the Social Impact Assessment study is fixed for six months from the date of publication of the notification. It is provided that the Social Impact Assessment Study Team would conduct various activities specified under the notification during such period and submit its report. 9. As noted, the prime concern of the petitioners is that the ONGC is occupying their lands by paying rent which, according to the petitioners, is extremely low, at the same time, not taking up serious steps for acquisition of such lands on permanent basis. In view of the developments, noted above, this grievance of the petitioners must be substantially redressed. It is true that before the land can be acquired, multiple stages would have to be completed. In view of the developments, noted above, this grievance of the petitioners must be substantially redressed. It is true that before the land can be acquired, multiple stages would have to be completed. Nevertheless, under the request of the ONGC, the State Government has already set the machinery in motion. In furtherance of such steps, the State Government has issued notification under Section 4 of the Act of 2013 setting up a Social Impact Assessment Study Team and inviting study report within six months from the date of publication of the notification which was done on or around 18.01.2016. 10. We notice that, upon submission of such report of the said team, Section 7 of the Act of 2013 requires the State Government to have the same evaluated by independent multi-disciplinary Expert Group, as may be constituted. Section 8 provides for examination of proposals for land acquisition and Social Impact Assessment report by appropriate Government. After following these stages under Section 11 of the Act of 2013, the appropriate Government would publish preliminary notification along with details of land to be acquired. In terms of Section 14 of the Act of 2013, if the preliminary notification under Section 11 of the Act is not issued within twelve months from the date of appraisal of the Social Impact Assessment study report submitted by the Expert Group under Section 7, then, such report would be deemed to have lapsed and a fresh Social Impact Assessment would have to be undertaken before acquisition proceedings under Section 11. 11. Section 15 of the Act of 2013 envisages hearing by the interested persons once notification under Section 11 is issued. Section 23 of the Act pertains to enquiry and land acquisition award by Collector. In terms of Section 25, the Collector would pass award within 12 months from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 19 and, if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land would lapse. 12. It can thus be seen that for the Act of 2013, various time limits have been prescribed for completing different stages. 12. It can thus be seen that for the Act of 2013, various time limits have been prescribed for completing different stages. Now that the State Government has already initiated the proceedings for acquisition by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Act of 2013, we expect that the same would be carried out and completed as expeditiously as possible and, at any rate, within the time parameters prescribed under the said Act. 13. A minor issue, at this stage, needed to be tackled is with respect to the dispute between the ONGC and the Government of Gujarat as the Government insists that the ONGC must deposit the part of probable compensation with the State Government in terms of its agreement dated 18.06.2014. The ONGC, however, argued that the said agreement was entered into in terms of the Act of 1894 and presently, the ONGC is under no obligation to make any deposit in terms of the Act of 2013. Before proceeding any further, we make it clear viz. that, at the instance of the petitioners, we cannot force ONGC to abide by the terms of the said agreement. It was an agreement entered into between the Government of Gujarat and the ONGC and, the petitioners are neither the parties to the agreement nor can be stated to be direct beneficiaries thereof. Whether ONGC deposits such sum with the State Government or not, the petitioners can claim no compensation till the award is passed and lands are acquired. Thus the petitioners have neither the right to seek such directions, nor would benefit out of it. 14. Quite apart from this preliminary objection that we have to the petitioners' request for directing the ONGC to implement the terms of the said agreement, we are clearly of the opinion that the entire agreement was executed under a sheer mistaken belief of the existence of statute by both, ONGC as well as the Government of Gujarat. If one peruses the agreement minutely, all references, stages and statutory provisions referred are to the Act of 1894. If one peruses the agreement minutely, all references, stages and statutory provisions referred are to the Act of 1894. For example, in the preamble to the agreement, it is provided that the Government having caused an inquiry regarding acquisition of the land, if it is satisfied that it is needed for the purpose stated under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the ONGC, pursuant to Section 41 of the said Act, is required to enter into agreement with the Government. With this preamble, the agreement contains several clauses including that the ONGC shall pay to the Government entire cost for the land acquisition along with damages, cost, charges etc.; that the ONGC would deposit 25% of the probable final compensation within forty five days of the execution of the agreement; that the ONGC would be liable to pay compensation awarded under Section 23(2) of the Act along with such amount as shall be estimated by the Government for the cost. Clause 9 of the Agreement provided that, if the possession of the land is taken over under Section 17 of the Act before making an award, the ONGC, on demand by the Collector, deposit three free interest 2/3rd of the approximate amount of compensation. 15. It can thus bee seen that, at all stages, the agreement referred to various provisions of the Act of 1894, which was repealed by the Act of 2013 w.e.f. 01.01.2014. Even the proposal for the acquisition, on the basis of which the Government required the ONGC to enter into this agreement, did not refer to the Act of 2013. Thus, clearly both sides acted, as if, the Act of 1894 was still in operation and the acquisition would be carried out under such statute. Even the stages envisaged for ONGC to deposit part of probable compensation before the Government was in consonance with the provision of Act of 1894. Compensation under Section 23(2) also related to the said Act. 16. In view of this clear mistaken belief of fact on part of both sides, it would simply not be possible to direct the ONGC to make such deposits when the entire acquisition proceedings have been now undertaken under the Act of 2013. This Act also contains the provision for pre-deposit but, the stage has now been shifted under Section 19 of the new Act. This Act also contains the provision for pre-deposit but, the stage has now been shifted under Section 19 of the new Act. The ONGC would be required to make the deposit in terms of second proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 19. Sub section (2) of Section 19provides that the Collector shall publish a summary of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Scheme along with declaration referred to in sub section (1). Second proviso to sub section (2) of Section 19provides that no declaration under this sub section shall be made unless the Requiring Body deposits an amount, in full or part, as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government towards the cost of acquisition of the land. The third proviso provides that the Requiring Body shall deposit the amount promptly so as to enable the appropriate Government to publish a declaration within a period of twelve months from the date of publication of preliminary notification under Section 11. It can thus be seen that the stage for ONGC to deposit appropriate amount with the State Government would now arise only at the stage of Section 19 of the Act of 2013. The quantification of amount is left to the appropriate Government. Further proviso requires the Requiring Body to make such deposit promptly. Under the circumstances, the ONGC cannot be bound by its earlier agreement with the Government, instead, statutorily, it is duty bound to make payments in terms of sub section (2) of Section 19 of the Act of 2013. Though it is already stated so before us by the counsel for ONGC, we direct that the ONGC shall file undertaking before this Court latest by 31.03.2016 that such payment would be made to the Government as soon as demanded. The Government of Gujarat may further require the ONGC to execute an agreement to this effect, if so desired. These directions are issued in order to ensure smooth progress in the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Government. 17. Last issue required to be addressed is regarding interregnum rent to be paid by the ONGC to the land owners. We have noticed that since year 2007 or there about, the ONGC is occupying the land by paying periodic yearly rent which is fixed per sq.mtr basis. When the question of assessment of rent comes, one can either apply the formula of reasonable return of investment or, yield method. We have noticed that since year 2007 or there about, the ONGC is occupying the land by paying periodic yearly rent which is fixed per sq.mtr basis. When the question of assessment of rent comes, one can either apply the formula of reasonable return of investment or, yield method. If one looks purely at the lands as agriculture lands, the current return of rent would perhaps far exceed the agriculture yield. However, if one looks at the current market value and rewards the land owners by a reasonable return on such market value, the current rent would definitely fall way short of the expectation. We wonder whether for a reasonable return on investment method, we can apply formula of current market value of the land. 18. However, in the present proceedings, we are not inclined to take final decision on such issues. This is for the reason that, we expect the land acquisition proceedings to be over within a couple of years. As noted, the Government has given time of six months to the Social Impact Assessment Study Team to submit its report from the date of the notification dated 18.01.2016. Once this report is submitted, the statue envisages a maximum of 11 months between Section 7 stage and publication of preliminary notification under Section 11. Thereafter also, as per Section 25, the final report would have to be passed within twelve months from the publication of the declaration under Section 19, failing which, the acquisition would lapse. Thus, these stages would have to be completed within time frame provided under the statute. The petitioners have voluntarily handed over possession of their lands to the ONGC by accepting rent, which was mutually fixed at the relevant time. In the interregnum period of couple of years, therefore, we would not like to drastically change this rent formula. Nevertheless, we notice that the rent revision was granted on 01.10.2014. Currently, therefore, this petitioners are receiving rent at the rate of Rs. 18/- per sq.mtr per annum (in some cases, it is at the rate of Rs. 20/- per mtr per annum). 19. Considering facts of the case, therefore, w.e.f. 01.01.2016, the ONGC shall pay rent to the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 25 per sq.mtr per annum which will operate till 31.12.2017 and would thereafter be revisable. 18/- per sq.mtr per annum (in some cases, it is at the rate of Rs. 20/- per mtr per annum). 19. Considering facts of the case, therefore, w.e.f. 01.01.2016, the ONGC shall pay rent to the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 25 per sq.mtr per annum which will operate till 31.12.2017 and would thereafter be revisable. If the land acquisition proceedings are not completed by the end of the year 2018, it would be open for the petitioners to file fresh proceedings for such relief, as may be advised. 20. Before closing, we may record that regarding the land covered under Special Civil Application No. 7006 of 2015, so far, notification under Section 4 of the Act also has not been published. Learned Government Pleader stated, under instructions, stated that the Government is in the process of issuing such notification. It may be done shortly. 21. With these directions, the petitions are disposed of. 22. Civil applications for amendment are allowed and disposed of accordingly.