SHARDULBHAI UNADBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred by the appellantclaimant challenging the legality, validity, and propriety of the judgment and award dtd. 30/12/2014 passed by the learned 5th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Amreli in Land Reference Case No. 34 of 2001. By the impugned judgment and award, the learned Reference Court partly allowed the reference case, fixing the compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.10.00 per sq. mtr. by categorizing the land as Jirayat land, instead of treating it as Bagayat land, which would have otherwise fetched compensation at the rate of Rs.13.05 per sq. mtr. (Rs.11.25 + Rs.1.80).

(2.) The brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the State Government initiated land acquisition proceedings for public purpose, acquiring land situated in the sim of village Zampodar, Taluka Rajula, District Amreli. The notification under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 28/10/1991, followed by the notification under Sec. 6 of the Act published on 08/10/1992. The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under Sec. 11(1) of the Act on 21/10/1994 in LAQ Case No. 46 of 1989, awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.568.50 per acre for Bagayat land and Rs.284.25 per acre for Jirayat land. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the appellant preferred a reference under Sec. 18 of the Act, which was numbered as Land Reference Case No. 34 of 2001 before the Reference Court, and the learned judge, after hearing the parties, has partly allowed the reference; hence, the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) The moot question as surfaced from the material in question is the issue with regard to the claim of the appellant herein, which wholly rests on to consider the land in question as a Bagayat land instead thereof a Jirayat land. The fundamental premise of the appellant 's appeal lies in seeking reclassification of the subject of land for the purpose of claiming higher market value, the nature of the land whether Bagayat or Jirayat is a question that this fact cannot be determined on flimsy or unverified claims. The burden lies squarely on the claimant to produce cogent and contemporaneous documentary and oral evidence demonstrating the actual presence and operation of irrigation facilities as on the crucial date of the Sec. 4 notification of land Acquisition Act.