(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE) The petitioners have approached this Court making following prayers:-
"A. To allow this writ petition and to issue appropriate writ, direction and order to the respondent to forthwith release requisite payment of compensation, solatium, interest,etc., in respect of the petitioners' acquired land bearing Block/Survey No.361 of Mouje Hirapur, Taluka : Sanand, Dist.Ahmedabad.
B. To grant ad-interim relief in terms of prayer Clause A above; subject to the final outcome of this writ petition.
C. To grant such other and further reliefs to the petitioners as may be deemed just and proper in the premises.
D. To award the costs to the petitioners"
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are the owners of part of Block/Survey No. 361 of village Hirapur, Taluka : Sanand, District : Ahmedabad, admeasuring 16,492 sq.mts., and that their land has been acquired by respondent No.1. It is the further case of the petitioners that no compensation has been paid to the petitioners despite lapse of about two years. Hence, this petition.
3. We have heard learned advocate Mr.Gupta for the petitioners.
4. According to Mr.Gupta, the petitioners are the owners of the land in question. The land has been acquired and no compensation is paid to them. The reason for non-payment of compensation, according to Mr.Gupta, is that a third party has filed a Suit wherein the land in question is claimed to be of the ownership of that plaintiff and, therefore, respondent No.1, authority, is not taking any action.
5. Except the Extracts of Village Form Nos. 6, 7 & 12 and 8A, the petitioners do not have any documents of title to show their ownership of the land in question. Except oral version that compensation is not paid to the petitioners by respondent No.1 because of pendency of the Suit filed by a third party against some other third parties, there is nothing on record to show that the petitioners are entitled to compensation and are not paid compensation because of the said reason.
6. Accepting the case of the petitioners at its face value, respondent No.1 is seized of the question of deciding quantum of compensation and the question of deciding entitlement of compensation by the petitioners. Under the circumstances, this petition cannot be entertained and it must fail.
7. However, it would be open for the petitioners to approach respondent No.1, authority, requesting him to decide the question of entitlement of compensation of the acquired land and of quantifying the same, and in that eventuality, respondent No.1 will take decision regarding entitlement of compensation by the petitioners.
8. The petition stands dismissed with the above observations. D.S.Permitted.
[A.L.Dave,J.] [C.L.Soni,J.]
-patel Top