Same-project adjoining-village acquisitions warrant parity, with a 10% increase for the later Section 4 notification.

The appellants’ 510 sq. m. agricultural land at Village Vatrakgadh was acquired for the Sujlam Suflam Canal Spreading Scheme. The Section 4 notification was published on 6 May 2005, followed by a Section 6 notification on 30 November 2005; the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.8.50 per sq. m. for jirayat land.

The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.201.50 per sq. m., and the claimants appealed for further enhancement. They relied on awards for adjoining Village Ratanpur under the same irrigation scheme, where the High Court had determined compensation at Rs.308.25 per sq. m.; they sought a further 10% increase because Vatrakgadh’s Section 4 notification was issued about seven months later. The State accepted that the villages were adjoining and the acquisition was for the same purpose, while seeking an appropriate order.

1. Whether the compensation for the appellants’ land should be brought into line with the rate determined for adjoining Village Ratanpur, given the proximity of the villages and the same acquisition purpose.

2. Whether the later Section 4 notification for Vatrakgadh justified a 10% increase over the Ratanpur rate.

The acquisition proceeded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, including Sections 4, 6 and 9, which govern notification of acquisition and the hearing process.

For valuation, the Court relied on its earlier decisions in First Appeal No. 1057 of 2021 and allied matters, and First Appeal No. 1050 of 2022 and allied matters, which had determined compensation for comparable jirayat land at Rs.308.25 per sq. m. Applying those decisions, the Court treated the adjoining location, common irrigation scheme and later notification date as grounds for applying the comparable rate and a 10% increase; the judgment describes this increase as consistent with “prevailing practice”.

The Court considered the Ratanpur determination applicable because Vatrakgadh and Ratanpur share a boundary and the acquired lands were taken for the same Sujlam Suflam irrigation scheme. It therefore adopted Rs.308.25 per sq. m. as the comparable rate.

Since Vatrakgadh’s Section 4 notification followed Ratanpur’s by seven months and twelve days, the Court added 10%, stated to be Rs.18.75 per sq. m., and held that the resulting compensation was Rs.327 per sq. m. The judgment’s stated figures contain an arithmetic inconsistency: Rs.327 minus the Reference Court’s Rs.201.50 is Rs.125.50, although the judgment states that the additional compensation is Rs.117 per sq. m.

The balance was directed to be deposited within six weeks, and the Reference Court was directed to disburse the amount after deducting court fees and verifying the claimants’ identities and entitlement.