MANUBHAI SENDHABHAI BHARWAD & ANR. versus OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 1 S.C.R. 1021 · Decided: 20-01-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1021
1021
MANUBHAI SENDHABHAI BHARWAD & ANR.
v.
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD. & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 472 of 2023)
JANUARY 20, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND M. M. SUNDRESH, JJ.]
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 – Constitution of India – Art. 300A – The
subject land was under temporary acquisition by ONGC since 1996
– Appellant (owner) purchased the subject land vide sale deed dated
15.03.2005 – Appellants were paid Rs 24/sq. metre per annum as
rent – Appellants approached the High Court seeking to quash the
temporary acquisition proceedings or to release the land from
acquisition – The High Court rejected the prayer for quashing
temporary acquisition proceedings and ordered for permanent
acquisition within 12 months – The Court further directed that the
Corporation would consider the claim of the appellants for paying
rent at Rs. 1,000/- per square meter per month till acquisition of the
land on permanent basis – On appeal, held: Temporary acquisition
cannot continue for approximately 20 to 25 years and same can be
said to be arbitrary and infringing right to use the property under
Art. 300A of Constitution of India – If the permanent acquisition is
not done within a stipulated time as per the order of the High Court
necessary consequence shall follow – As far rent is concerned, as
per s.34 of the 1894 Act if the appellant is aggrieved by the
compensation/annual rent, it is open for the appellant to approach
the Collector.
Disposing of the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1. Approximately 26 years have passed and still
the land in question is under temporary acquisition by the ONGC.
If the land is continued to be under temporary acquisition for
number of years, meaning and purpose of temporary acquisition
would lose its significance. Temporary acquisition cannot be
continued for approximately 20 to 25 years. It cannot be disputed
that once the land is under temporary acquisition and the same is
   [2023] 1 S.C.R. 1021
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1022
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 1 S.C.R.
being used by the ONGC for oil exploration, it may not be possible
for the landowners to use the land; to cultivate the same and/or
to deal with the same in any manner. To continue with the
temporary acquisition for number of years would be arbitrary and
can be said to be infringing the right to use the property
guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Even
to continue with the temporary acquisition for a longer period
can be said to be unreasonable, infringing the rights of the
landowners to deal with and/or use the land. As such, in the
impugned judgment and order, the High Court has granted time
to the ONGC and the State to acquire the land in question
permanently within twelve months from the date of the impugned
order, i.e., within twelve months from 26.04.2022, i.e., on or
before 26.04.2023. Therefore, if the land in question is not
acquired as per the writ issued by the High Court within a
stipulated time, necessary consequence shall follow. [Para
7][1027-F-H; 1028-A-B, C-E;]
2. Now so far as the grievance with respect to the quantum
of annual rent paid is concerned, the High Court has already
issued directions in terms of para 7(iii) of the impugned judgment
and order. Even otherwise, as per section 34 of the 1894 Act, if
the appellants are aggrieved by the amount of compensation/
annual rent, it will always be open to the appellants/landowners
to approach the Collector and the Collector shall refer such
reference to the decision of the Court. [Para 8][1028-F-G]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.472 of
2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.04.2022 of the High Court
of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in R/Special Civil Application No.9258 of 2021.
Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Sr. Adv., Jatin Zaveri, Neel Kamal
Mishra, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Advs. for the Appellants.
Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG, Deepak Jain, Pradeep K.B., Ms.
Jaspreet Aulagh, Tanpreet Gulati, Vaibhav Manu Srivastava, Ms.
Deepanwita Priyanka, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Ms. Devyani Bhatt, Advs.
for the Respondents.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1023
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order dated 26.04.2022 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at
Ahmedabad in SCA No. 9258/2021, by which the High Court has
dismissed the said writ petition preferred by the appellants – or

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.