Gujarat High Court
Bhailalbhai Jerambhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat Notice To Be Served ... on 22 April, 2026
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/5029/2014 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5029 of 2014
==========================================================
BHAILALBHAI JERAMBHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT NOTICE TO BE SERVED THROUGH THE SECRETARY &
ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
DELETED for the Petitioner(s) No. 16,18,5
MR. KAUSHAL H. PATEL FOR MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,17,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,
37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,6,60,61,62
,63,7,8,9
MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,12,13,14,15,17,19,2,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,3,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,
37,38,39,4,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,6,60,61,62
,63,7,8,9
MS. HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s)
No. 1&2
MR RD DAVE(264) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 22/04/2026
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, we may note that the present petition has been filed on 28.03.2014, soon after enforcement of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with effect from 01.01.2014, to seek the following reliefs :-
"(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 28 22:05:58 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/5029/2014 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined appropriate writ, order or directions holding that the acquisition for the lands in question, for which award is passed on 17.10.2000, have lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Transparency Compensation and in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013;
ALTERNATIVELY (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside award dated 17.10.2000 for the lands in question (at ANNEXURE-C hereto) as well as notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 for the lands in question (at ANNEXURE-A & B hereto respectively) and further be pleased to hold and declare that the action of the respondent authorities in trying to change the purpose of the lands in question of the petitioners and attempting to divest the lands in question to industrialists / corporate units is illegal, arbitrary, violative of the Constitution of India and provisions of the Act and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to return the lands in question to their concerned petitioners;
(C) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to maintain status-quo with respect to lands in question and also further be pleased to direct not to disturb possession of the petitioners over the said lands in question;
(D) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case."
2. As per own case of the petitioners, the acquisition notifications for the lands-in-question were published under Section 4 and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 09.05.1997 and 28.08.1998; respectively. The award with respect to the lands- in-question had been passed by the Collector on 17.10.2000. It is stated in the writ petition that Reference under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 was filed by certain persons, registered as Land Reference Case Nos. 797-880 of 2002, which came to be disposed of on 17.06.2008. However, it is not disclosed as to whether the petitioners herein had filed the Reference or not.
Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 28 22:05:58 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/5029/2014 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined
3. Be that as it may, the only ground to challenge the acquisition proceedings concluded in the year 2000, in the present petition filed after 14 years, is that the lands-in-question have not been utilised for the purpose for which they were initially acquired.
4. In so far as the prayer made in the writ petition about the lapse of the land acquisition proceedings by virtue of Section 24(2) of the Act,. 2013, suffice it to say that absolutely no foundation has been laid in the writ petition to invoke the said deemed lapse provision, inasmuch as, there is a complete silence in the writ petition about the compensation received under the award of 2000 and the possession of the lands having been taken by the GIDC. From the contentions in the writ petition, it seem to be an admission that the possession of the lands-in-question is with the GIDC, inasmuch as, the petitioners would contend that the GIDC has not utilised the lands-in-question for 14 years for the purposes for which it was acquired and, therefore, it is required to be released, by cancelling the award. The statement in paragraph No. '33' of the writ petition is that the GIDC had acquired the land-in- question for housing project, but has not used it for the said purpose.
5. Taking note of this stand of the petitioners to assail the land acquisition proceeding, and in turn the award dated 17.10.2000, suffice it to say that under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with the making of the award under Section 11 and possession taken by the Collector in exercise of powers under Section 16, the acquired land vests absolutely in the State Government free from all encumbrances. There is no provision of divesting from the lands-
Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 28 22:05:58 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/5029/2014 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined
in-question and the only provision for release of the acquired land contained in Section 48 of the Act, 1894, can be invoked, in case, where the State decides to withdraw from acquisition of any land, possession whereof has not been taken.
6. It is settled law that the land acquired for the public purpose may be utilised for another public purposes. Moreover, as per own case of the petitioners, the lands-in-question has been acquired for the GIDC, as it falls in a notified industrial area. The allotment of the acquired land to the prospective industries by the GIDC in the industrial estate, cannot be termed as a transfer of acquired land for public purpose to private parties, as is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
7. We may further note that the present petition has been filed by 63 persons, residents of the same village, affected by the same acquisition. However, one of them has filed a writ petition in the year 2000, namely Special Civil Application No. 10556 of 2000 challenging the award passed under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 on the premise that the land acquisition proceedings stood lapsed, inasmuch as, the award was passed after a period of more than 2 years. The said writ petition has been dismissed vide judgment and order dated 08.04.2002 noticing the stand of the petitioners themselves that they had accepted the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under protest and had also made request for Reference under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 to the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
8. It may also be noted that it is also recorded by the Court Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 28 22:05:58 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/5029/2014 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 undefined therein that the possession of the lands-in-question had been taken from the land owners on 17.10.2000 by the State and the same had been handed over to the acquired body, namely the GIDC, on 17.02.2001.
9. A second writ petition was filed in the year 2013, namely Special Civil Application No. 473 of 2013, wherein it was asserted that the GIDC was proposing to give the land earlier acquired to the industrial units, however, the said petition has been dismissed, as premature, holding that the said proposal was still under process.
10. From the above, it is evident that the petitioners herein (63 in number) filed repeated writ petitions challenging the acquisition proceedings and the act of the GIDC in dealing with the lands-in- question on one or other occasion on different grounds. But the fact remains that the land acquisition proceedings had been concluded with the making of the award dated 17.10.2000 and the possession of the land-in-question having been taken by the GIDC in the year 2001, no challenge to the acquisition proceedings can be entertained on the premise of the acquired land is not being used for the purposes mentioned in the acquisition notification.
11. In view of the above, the present petition stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (D.N.RAY,J) C.M. JOSHI Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Tue Apr 28 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 28 22:05:58 IST 2026