Gujarat Industrial Development ... vs Ibrahim Ismail Panchbhaya & on 2 May, 2017
Learned advocate,
Shri Saiyed submitted that it is not that the land
is less developed than Village : Galkhod or
Pipana. He referred to the background and
submitted that this land is also adjoining to both
villages. He emphasized that the acquisition of
the land is also for the same purpose of GIDC and,
therefore, the judgment and order of the Reference
Court cannot be said to be without considering the
relevant criteria or the evidence as sought to be
canvassed. Learned advocate, Shri Saiyed referred
to and relied upon the judgment of the High Court
in case of State of Gujarat Vs. Maganbhai
Kodarbhai Suthar delivered in First Appeal
Nos.2210 to 2219 of 2001 vide judgment dated
24.07.2006 ( = 2006 JX (Guj) 275) and submitted
that it has been discussed about the justification
of sale instance of similar type of land and of
the same village. However he submitted that same
village would not be the only criteria if the land
or the nature of the land is more similarly to the
Page 6 of 16
HC-NIC Page 6 of 16 Created On Wed Aug 16 13:42:13 IST 2017
C/FA/3915/2010 JUDGMENT
adjacent village where the land is acquired for
the same purpose. He submitted that entire land of
23 villages near to road have been acquired and,
therefore, the submission about the earlier sale
instance cannot be relied upon as it refers to the
acquisition of the land, which was interior for
the purpose of ONGC. He also submitted that if the
land situated is adjacent to other village, it
will also be relevant.