ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. By means of the present petition, filed in the year 2016, the petitioner seeks 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 appropriate benefit in form of monetary compensation/ rehabilitation/ relief as per policy and decision of Government pursuant to Resolutions dated 27.04.2015 as well as 15.07.2015 issued by the Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat to the tune of Rs.25,000/- 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 grant compensation at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per hectare to the petitioner as provided in the Resolutions dated 27.04.2015 as well as 15.07.2015 for the damages which have been caused to the crop and lands of the petitioner and villagers;
(d) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, to call for the report from the concerned respondents with regard to the representation of the petitioner and villagers;
(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 petitioner as stated in the writ petition is that he is farmer/agriculturist of District Banaskantha and is 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 petitioner 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 petitioner is that he has been provided compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- per hectare, towards damage to the crop as well to the land due to heavy
Page 2 of 7
rainfall, as per resolutions dated 27.04.2015 and 15.07.2015 of the Revenue Department. It is contended in the writ petition that no compensation has been paid to the petitioner.
4. A representation dated 31.03.2016 was, thereafter, sent to the Collector, Banakantha seeking enhanced amount of compensation. The petitioner has also made a representation dated 29.03.2016 to the Deputy Collector, Deodar seeking amount of compensation.
5. It is, thus, the case of the petitioner 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 petitioner, we may record the stand of the Taluka Development Officer, Deodar Taluka Panchayat, Banaskantha in its affidavit dated 26.12.2016 at page - '111', wherein details have been given to the manner in which a team was constituted to survey the damage by District Development Officer, Banaskantha District
Page 3 of 7
Panchayat and District Agriculture Officer, Banaskantha. The survey was conducted by the team and survey report was submitted. Thereafter, the District Agriculture Officer, Banaskantha District Panchayat has cleared the amount for disbursement of relief and the Taluka Development Officer, Deodar Taluka Panchayat has transferred the amount payable to the petitioner as well as other beneficiaries, which was directly credited to the bank account of the petitioner. It is stated in the affidavit that the petitioner has paid compensation of Rs.27,000/- on the basis of upper limit of 2 hectare, by way of direct crediting amount in his bank account on 03.11.2015 and a compensation of Rs.13,500/- per hectare is calculated as per the Government Resolution dated
27.04.2015.
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, Deodar Taluka Panchayat.
8. We may simply note that though there is an assertion in the affidavit of the Taluka Development Officer, Deodar
Page 4 of 7
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 grievance of the petitioner 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
Page 5 of 7
State Land Development Corporation Limited. It seems that the representations of the petitioner addressed to the Collector, Banaskantha was 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 petitioner, 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 petitioner herein may file their individual representation/ application 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 representation/application being received, the District Development Officer, Vav Tharad District Panchayat, would be required to deal with each representation/application by complying with the principles of natural justice, giving due notice and opportunity to the applicant/ representationist to present their case.
Page 6 of 7
(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 applicant/ representationist.
(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