HC held that areas under an urban development authority cannot be considered as ‘urban area’ for the purpose of calculating the awards for land acquisition
In a judgment that would have wider ramifications and add to the financial burden of the state government, the Gujarat High Court on Thursday held that areas under an urban development authority cannot be considered as 'urban area' for the purpose of calculating the awards for land acquisition.
The division bench of Justice AS Dave and Justice Biren Vaishnav also set aside the resolutions passed by the state government on November 10, 2016 and September 11, 2018, defining the areas that are to be considered as 'urban' and 'rural' while acquiring the land. The verdict came in response to petitions filed by owners of 69 land parcels in Lavarpur, Ferozpur, and Pratiya village of Gandhinagar district, which was acquired by the government for the expansion of National Highway 8.
As per the 2016 resolution, the state government declared that urban areas would mean the areas under a civic body and also the areas under an urban development authority. However, the government amended the 2016 resolution with a fresh resolution in September 2018 by way of each it clarified that only the areas under a civic body will be considered as an urban area.
The difference between urban and rural areas matters in the case of land acquisition as for rural areas, the beneficiaries get four times the market rate of the land, whereas for urban areas, they get only twice the market rate.
The land owners claimed that they were compensated in 2016 at the rate of twice the market price of the land as their land parcels were within the ambit of the Gandhinagar Urban Development Authority and was treated as urban area. They moved the high court through their lawyer Saurabh Amin against the same and claimed that their land parcels are in rural areas and they should be compensated at the rate of four times the market price of the land.
While challenging the government resolutions of 2016 and 2018, the petitioners claimed that government cannot change the definition of urban and rural areas by way of resolutions and the law needs to be amended for the same. It was also argued that urban areas have been defined under Article 243 of the Constitution and the resolutions passed by the state government was in contravention of constitutional provisions.
Meanwhile, the division bench ordered the government to compensate the land owners at the rate of four times the market rate.
THE VERDICT
- HC held that areas under an urban development authority cannot be considered as ‘urban area’ for the purpose of calculating the awards for land acquisition
- Verdict came in response to petitions filed by owners of 69 land parcels acquired by the government for the expansion of NH 8
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Land acquisition")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}