State cannot challenge compensation rate it accepted for adjoining lands acquired in same project

The land in Village Ambaliya, Taluka Malpur, District Sabarkantha was acquired for the public purpose of constructing four-lane Highway No. 5 from Shamlaji to Godhara

Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were published on 28.01.2008 and 04.08.2008 respectively

The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under Section 11 on 24.05.2010, awarding compensation at Rs.5.00/- per sq. mtr. for open land

The claimants sought reference under Section 18 claiming Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr., registered as Land Reference Case Nos. 176 to 189 of 2017 & 193 of 2017

The Reference Court allowed the references and awarded compensation at Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr. (inclusive of the SLAO's award) with statutory benefits and interest, relying on Exhibits 98, 103 and 104 — being awards in prior land reference cases

The State preferred the present First Appeals under Section 54, contending that the strata of land under the earlier and present acquisitions were different and could not be equated

1. Whether the learned Reference Court erred in fixing compensation at Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr. by relying upon awards passed in respect of lands acquired under earlier notifications in adjoining villages (Exs. 98, 103 & 104)?

2. Whether the State, having accepted and complied with the earlier awards granting compensation at Rs.565/-, Rs.1,000/- and Rs.1,120/- per sq. mtr. for notifications prior in time, could challenge the fixation of Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr. for the 2008 acquisition?

The Court dealt with appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award passed in references under Section 18 of the Act, concerning determination of market value of acquired land

The governing principle applied was the comparable award/sale instance method for assessing market value: where lands in adjoining villages with contiguous boundaries are acquired for the same public purpose, and awards fixing compensation for such comparable lands under earlier notifications have been accepted by the State, those awards constitute a legitimate basis for determining compensation for a subsequent acquisition proximate in time

The Court undertook a comparative assessment of the awards relied upon by the Reference Court: (i) LAR No. 1514/2010 (Section 4 notification of 1992, Village Malpur) — Rs.565/- per sq. mtr.; (ii) LAR No. 73/1999 (notification prior to 1998, Village Ramgadhi) — Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr.; and (iii) LAR No. 960/2010 (notifications of 2005 and 2006, Village Ramgadhi) — Rs.1,120/- per sq. mtr.

The Court found that Village Ambaliya is only approximately 8 km from Village Ramgadhi, the purpose of acquisition in all cases was identical (the Godhra–Shamlaji highway), and the villages are adjoining with contiguous boundaries

Since the present Sections 4 and 6 notifications (2008) were later in point of time than those in the cited cases, and the State had accepted and complied with the earlier awards (including higher rates), the rate of Rs.1,000/- per sq. mtr. for the 2008 acquisition was held to be justified and indeed conservative relative to the Rs.1,120/- rate fixed for the 2005–06 notifications

The learned AGP, in fairness, conceded the State's compliance with the earlier orders and failed to point out any valid reason warranting interference

The Reference Court was directed to disburse the remaining compensation to the claimants in accordance with the settled procedure after deducting court fees, if any

Separately, Civil Application (for Joining Party) No. 3 of 2024 was disposed of with a direction that the Reference Court grant the applicants an opportunity of hearing as and when they file an application for joining as party