NIMISH MANUBHAI PARIKH vs NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8295 of 2026
==========================================================
NIMISH MANUBHAI PARIKH
Versus
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
PANKEET P AUNDHIYA(9421) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR SANJAY UDHWANI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No.3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.
JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY

Date : 23/06/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
th
1. This is a Fourth [4 ] petition filed for the same cause of
action, with the reliefs as under:-
“6(A) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more
particularly a writ of mandamus, directing the
Respondents to forthwith deposit and release the
compensation amount payable to the Petitioner in respect
of the land bearing Survey No.412 (part), situated at
Village Samiyala, Taluka & District Vadodara, acquired for
the Vadodara-Mumbai Expressway project, in accordance
with law;
(B) Direct the Respondents to pay all consequential
Page 1 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
statutory benefits, including solatium and interest, as
applicable under the provisions of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, for the period
of delay in payment;
(C) Direct the Respondents to comply with the revised
award and/or any determination made pursuant to the
directions of this Hon'ble Court, within a time-bound
period as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court;
(D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the
present petition, direct the Respondents to deposit the
entire compensation amount before this Hon'ble Court;
(E) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the
present petition, restrain the Respondents, their agents
and servants from proceeding with further use,
development or creation of third-party rights in respect of
the Petitioner’s land, unless lawful compensation is
paid/deposited;
(F) Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
2. The petitioner herein seeks to submit that the land
bearing Survey No.412 (Part) at Village: Samiyala, Taluka and
District: Vadodara was converted into non-agricultural
purposes as per N.A. conversion order dated 21.04.1970 and
was reflected as non-agricultural land in the revenue records,
Page 2 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
appending the copy of 7/12 extract showing the N.A. status of
the land-in-question.
3. The contention is that pursuant to an acquisition
proceedings conducted under the National Highways Act,
1956 [herein after referred to as “ the Act’ 1956 ”], the land-in-
question was acquired and an award dated 05.09.2017 came
to be passed. The award erroneously treated the land-in-
question as agricultural land and awarded a meager amount
ignoring the N.A. status of the land-in-question recorded in
the revenue records. Besides that, only multiplier Factor-1 has
been granted while determining compensation.
4. The submission is that after passing of the award, the
petitioner made a representation in the year 2020 and there
were some exchange of communications between the
petitioner and the office of the Competent Authority/
Collector, whereafter a writ petition namely Special Civil
Application No.6910 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner
seeking for a direction to the respondent to decide his
representation. By judgment and order dated 11.04.2022, the
said writ petition has been disposed of with the directions as
Page 3 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
under:-
“1. Mr. K.M. Antani, learned Assistant Government
Pleader is on advance notice on behalf of respondent no.1,
Mr. Maulik Nanavati accepts notice for respondent 2 and
Mr. Parth Bhatt, learned Central Government Standing
Counsel accepts notice for respondent 3. Registry to print
their names in the cause list.
2. Petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
“9(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to order the
Respondent no. 1 to pass an order directing the
Respondent No. 1 to decide the application/representation
dated 22.07.2020 and further direct the Respondent No.1
to revise the award by considering the Non-Agricultural
land price that being Rs.4440/- per sq.mtr as against the
Agricultural land rate thereby being Rs.2150/- per sq.mtr.,
and thereby provide for Factor-1 of the said incremented
price.
(B) Your Lordship may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ
of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any
other appropriate writ, direction or order and be pleased
to direct the Respondent No. 1 to amend/modify/revise the
award dated 05.09.2017 bearing No. LAQ/Vadodara-
Mumbai Express way/Samiyala Compensation Case No.
20/2013 and re-compute the compensation qua the lands
of the petitioner by multiplying the market value as per
the Non Agricultural land price of Rs.4440/- per sq.mtrs.,
as determined under Section 26(1) of the LARR, 2013 Act
along with the same apply for the factor of 2(two) and
applying all other statutory benefits as provided under the
LARR Act, 2013 including solatium under Section 30(1),
interest under Section 30(3) and be further pleased to
direct the respondents to pay the same, with interest from
05.09.2017 @ 9% for the first year and 15% per annum for
subsequent years till date of realization within 6 weeks of
the judgment.”
3. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the
Page 4 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
parties. Petitioner claims to be the owner of land bearing
Survey No. 412 admeasuring 0.1329 HA-RA-Sq.mtrs., of
Village Samiyala, Taluka and District Vadodara. By
issuance of Notification under Section 3A of the National
Highways Act, 1956 dated 03.03.2014, the land of the
petitioner came to be notified for acquisition namely, for
the public purpose of construction of the Vadodara-
Mumbai Express Way, which was followed by the
Notification issued under Section 3D of the National
Highways Act, published on 05.03.2015. By virtue of order
dated 28.08.2015 passed by the Government of India, in
exercise of the powers conferred under Section 113, the
provisions for computing compensation under the Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short
“LARR Act, 2013”) was extended to and made applicable
to acquisitions under 13 Acts, enumerated thereunder
namely listed in fourth Schedule which includes the
National Highways Act, with effect from 01.11.2015.
4. Petitioner claims land owned by him do not fall within
limits of any ‘transitional area, smaller urban area, falling
within the limits of urban local body or Municipal
Corporation.” In other words, it is contended that said
land does not have any testimony bearing Agricultural
activities being carried out either in the said land or the
land surrounding it. On the contrary, it is claimed that said
land is non agricultural land. Hence, contending that
petitioner is entitled to compensation as such, namely by
considering his land as Non Agricultural land. It is also
contended that land in question is a Non Agricultural land
having been converted for Non Agricultural purposes way
Page 5 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
back on 21.04.1970, however, the award which is said to
have been passed is on the strength of land being
construed as an agricultural land and determining
compensation at Rs.2,150/- per sq.mtrs., as against 4,440/-
per sq.mtrs., assessed in respect of Non Agricultural land.
Hence, petitioner is said to have submitted an application/
representation on 22.07.2020 by respondent authorities,
which has not been considered and as such, a writ of
mandamus is sought for by the petitioner to the first
respondent to decide application/representation dated
22.07.2020 and a further direction is sought to the first
respondent to revise the award by considering the land of
petitioner as Non Agricultural land as against its
determination of being agricultural land and thereby,
provide “Factor-1” for the said incremental price.
5. In light of the afore-stated facts, we notice that
representation dated 22.07.2020 submitted by the
petitioner has not been considered and if it were to be so,
it would be necessary that first respondent should
consider the representation dated 22.07.2020 submitted
by the petitioner in accordance with law. Shri K.M. Antani,
learned Assistant Government Pleader, would fairly submit
that said representation would be considered in
accordance with law within an outer-limit of four (4)
weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order if
not already considered. However, we make it clear that we
have not expressed any opinion with regard to merits and
also with regard to the claim made by petitioner in his
representation and the direction issued to the first
respondent to consider the representation shall not be
construed by said authority as having been directed to
Page 6 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
consider the representation in any particular fashion or
manner. It is open to the first respondent to consider the
representation in accordance with law and without being
prejudiced by any observations made by us or any order
passed earlier.
6. Accordingly Special Civil Application stands disposed
of.”
5. The petitioner then initiated a contempt proceedings
registered as Misc. Civil Application No.1362 of 2022 which
was closed on the submission made by the learned Assistant
Government Pleader that the representation of the petitioner
in compliance of the judgment and order dated 11.04.2022
was already decided on 04.02.2023.
nd
6. The Second [2 ] writ petition namely Special Civil
Application No.6247 of 2023 was filed raising the same issue
which was dismissed as withdrawn on the request made by
the learned counsel for the petitioner therein vide judgment
and order dated 13.04.2023 with the liberty to challenge the
order dated 04.02.2023 passed by the respondent no.2 therein
rejecting the representation of the petitioner.
rd
7. The Third [3 ] writ petition namely Special Civil
Page 7 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
Application No.11176 of 2023 was filed challenging the award
dated 05.09.2017 on the ground that the determination of
compensation under the said award was wrong as the non-
agricultural land has been treated as agricultural. The said
writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated
13.12.2023 with the observation that the question as to the
determination of compensation would require a factual inquiry
and further the petitioner has a remedy to invoke Section
3G(5) by moving a proper application to refer the dispute to
the Arbitration.
8. The contention in the present petition is that the
petitioner has preferred an arbitration application invoking
Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 in the year
2023. The date mentioned in Paragraph–‘2.12’ of the petition
that the petitioner had applied to the Collector/Arbitrator on
01.07.2023 is wrong as is evident from the Page–‘103’ of the
paper-book where there is an endorsement of the office of the
Collector on receipt of the said application under Section
3G(5) on 03.01.2024. From the statement made in the writ
petition, it is evident that the petitioner has given wrong dates
in the entire petition and misleading fact about the filing of
Page 8 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
the arbitration application before the Arbitrator.
9. It is evident that only after the third writ petition was
disposed of vide order dated 13.12.2023, the petitioner has
invoked the provision of Section 3G(5) which provide
mechanism for redetermination of award by an Arbitrator.
th
Now this is the Fourth [4 ] writ petition which has been filed
with the reliefs to issue directions to the respondents to
forthwith deposit and release compensation amount with
respect to the land bearing Survey No.412 (Part), situated at
Village : Samiyala, Taluka and District Vadodara acquired for
Vadodara-Mumbai Expressway Project including all
consequential benefits, solatium and interest.
10. Ms. Dhara Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf
of the NHAI would invite the attention of the Court to
Page–‘101’ of the paper-book, which is the letter sent by the
Chitnis to Collector, Vadodara, to the General Manager and
Project Director, NHAI, Panchmahal. A perusal of the said
letter indicates that the same was written with reference to
the communication dated 17.07.2025 sent by the NHAI. The
letter dated 17.07.2025 at Page–‘102’ of the paper-book
Page 9 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
categorically records that the legal opinion of the NHAI
Counsel on the revised/ sudhara award dated 16.12.2022 has
already been provided to the office of the Collector/
Competent Authority under the National Highways Act vide
office letter dated 02.01.2023. However, the letter at
Page–‘101’ of the paper-book sent by the Chitnis to Collector,
Vadodara records that the Collector, Vadodara has passed an
order that the clarification given by the NHAI on the sudhara
award/corrected award dated 16.12.2022 was not tenable and
further in view of the directions issued by this Court, there is
a need to comply with the corrected/revised order dated
16.12.2022 and the compensation amount was required to be
deposited as per the determination made therein treating the
land-in-question as non-agricultural land.
11. Pertinent is to note that there is no disclosure in the writ
petition as to how the petitioner could lay his hands on these
two inter-departmental communications supposedly made by
the Chitnis to Collector, Vadodara dated 08.09.2025 and the
letter dated 17.07.2025 written by the Project Director,PIU-
Godhra to the Collector and District Magistrate, Vadodara.
Moreover, any communication made by the Chitnis to
Page 10 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
Collector, Vadodara, appended at Page–‘101’ of the paper-
book would require a further inquiry by the Collector himself
as to how his subordinate would write directly to the General
Manager and Project Director, NHAI, Panchmahal.
12. From the submission made by the learned counsel for
the petitioner and in view of the prayers made in the writ
petition, it is evident that either the letter dated 08.09.2025
was written at the instance of the petitioner himself or has
been prepared by the petitioner himself, to take undue
benefits from this Court. This fact can be ascertained only
upon an inquiry to be made by the Collector on his own. We,
therefore, direct the Collector, Vadodara to make an inquiry
and submit a report to us through the Registrar General of the
High Court as to how and in what circumstances the Chitnis
to Collector, Vadodara, can write the letter to the General
Manager and Project Director, NHAI without any reference to
the details of the order passed by the Collector along with its
date.
13. Further on the prayers made by the petitioner, as we
have found that the petitioner has approached this Court
Page 11 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026

C/SCA/8295/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 23/06/2026
repeatedly for the same relief and has not come with the clean
hands while stating that the application under Section 3G(5)
filed by him is pending for consideration before the Collector
and for the doubts expressed by us herein above to the
manner in which the copies of the inter-departmental
communications dated 17.07.2025 and 08.09.2025 are
obtained by the petitioner, we are of the considered view that
the petitioner is an unscrupulous litigant and the present writ
petition has been filed with ulterior motives to obtain an order
by misleading this Court.
14. For the misleading statements made in the writ petition
[specifically Para–‘2.11’ of the writ petition] and the facts
noted herein above, we dismiss the present petition with the
cost of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) which shall
be deposited by the petitioner within a period of three (03)
weeks from today, failing which, the cost amount shall be
realized as arrears of land revenue.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ)
(D.N.RAY,J)
A. B. VAGHELA
Page 12 of 12
Uploaded by A. B. VAGHELA(HC01079) on Sun Jun 28 2026 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 28 16:03:18 IST 2026