ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. By means of the present petition, filed in the year 2016, the petitioners seek following reliefs:-
"7(a) To allow this petition;
(b) To issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or directions directing the concerned respondents to grant monetary relief/ compensation/ damage as per Resolution dated 27.04.2015 as well as 15.07.2015 issued by the Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat to the tune of Rs.60,000/- per hectare;
Page 1 of 7
(c) To issue writ of mandamus and/ or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the concerned respondents to consider/ decide and grant compensation at the rate of Rs.60,000/- per hectare to the petitioners as serious damage has been caused to the crop and lands of the petitioners have been washed out;
(d) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, to call for the report from the concerned respondents upon the representations of the petitioners;
(e) To pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper to this Hon'ble Court."
2. The case of the petitioners [163 in number] as stated in the writ petition is that they are farmers/agriculturists of District Banaskantha and are aggrieved by the lesser amount of compensation awarded to them towards the damage of their agricultural fields due to heavy rainfall and flood and other damages.
3. The contention is that the compensation awarded to the petitioners is comparatively lesser than what they were entitled to due to the area of damaged land considered by the Surveyor Officer during survey for grant of compensation being reported as less compared to the total area of the damaged land. The case of the petitioners is that they have
Page 2 of 7
been provided compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- per hectare which was a ceiling limit upto 2 hectare on the premise that it was on account of rain that the crop and the lands of the petitioners were damaged, as per resolutions dated 27.04.2015 and 15.07.2015 of the Revenue Department. It is contended in the writ petition that they ought to have been granted compensation of Rs.60,000/- per hectare as the damage was caused on account of overflowing as well as diversion of the flow of water from river 'Rel'.
4. A representation dated 28.03.2016 was, thereafter, sent to the Relief Commissioner, Gandhinagar seeking enhanced amount of compensation.
5. It is, thus, the case of the petitioners that discriminatory treatment has been given to them in the matter of grant of compensation under the scheme prepared by the Gujarat State Land Development Corporation Limited, authorized by the State Government.
6. Taking note of this contention of the petitioners, we may record the stand of the Taluka Development Officer, Lakhni
Page 3 of 7
Taluka Panchayat, Banaskantha in its affidavit dated 06.09.2016 at page - '96', wherein it is stated that the survey work of damage caused to agricultural land and standing crop was undertaken by Gujarat State Land Development Corporation Limited by way of constituting a survey team i.e. the District Development Officer and District Agriculture Officer, Banaskantha District Panchayat. The survey was conducted by the team and thereafter, the Assistant Director (Land Reforms), Gujarat State Land Development Corporation Limited, Palanpur has passed a detailed order dated 29.09.2015 granting compensation of Rs.1,23,33,750/- to 376 farmers and another order dated 15.02.2016 was passed by the said authority granted compensation of Rs.18,14,250/- to 53 more villagers. Thereafter, the District Development Officer, District Agriculture Officer and Accounts Officer of Banaskantha District Panchayat passed an order constituting a Committee for disbursement of relief to the beneficiaries, subject to certain terms and conditions mentioned therein.
7. Further action for disbursement of the amount in favour of the beneficiaries was taken and ultimately, the disbursement was made by the Taluka Development Officer,
Page 4 of 7
Lakhni Taluka Panchayat.
8. We may simply note that though there is an assertion in the affidavit of the Taluka Development Officer, Lakhni Taluka Panchayat, Banaskantha about the process of assessment of damages, determination of compensation and disbursement thereof to the affected persons, but there is no parawise reply to the writ petition.
9. Be that as it may, from a perusal of scheme, appended along with an affidavit filed today by the District Collector, Amreli in the connected Public Interest Litigation, it may be noted that as per the scheme, the assessment made by the Survey team is to be considered as final. However, the right to reconsider rests with the District Collector for an urban areas and the District Development Officer for rural areas. Similarly, as per Clause (6) of General Instructions of the Scheme, the District Collector for urban areas and District Development Officer for rural areas are authorized to sanction and pay assistance thereunder.
10. It is, thus, evident that the grievances of the petitioners
Page 5 of 7
for being accorded discriminatory treatment in the matter of survey and award of compensation could be considered by the District Development Officer, who was authorized to oversee the implementation of the scheme prepared by the Gujarat State Land Development Corporation Limited. It seems that the representations of the petitioners addressed to the Relief Commissioner, Gandhinagar were never placed before or considered by the District Development Officer.
11. Further we find that a factual inquiry is required to be conducted into the claims of the petitioners [163 in number], we do not find any good ground to keep the present petition pending. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the directions as follows:-
(i) The petitioners herein may file their individual representations/ applications before the District Development Officer, Vav Tharad District Panchayat, along with the copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today.
(ii) Upon such representations/applications being received, the District Development Officer, Vav Tharad District Panchayat, would be required to deal with each
Page 6 of 7
representation/application by complying with the principles of natural justice, giving due notice and opportunity to the applicants/ representationists to present their case.
(iii) After due hearing and verification of the relevant records, a reasoned and speaking order shall be passed dealing with each of the points in the representations received by the District Development Officer, under due intimation to the concerned applicants/ representationists.
(iv) In any case, the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representations/ applications, strictly in accordance with the directions given herein above.
12. Disposed of. Notice discharged.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
A. B. VAGHELA
Page 7 of 7