Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Gas Authority of India Limited and another, filed a writ petition challenging the compensation determined by the Competent Authority under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962. The petitioners had applied for acquisition of right of user in land in 17 villages for laying a natural gas pipeline. The Central Government issued notifications under Section 3 of the Act declaring its intention to acquire the right of user. The Competent Authority determined compensation, which the petitioners contested. The High Court, per H.S. Bedi, C.J., held that the determination of compensation by the Competent Authority is final subject to an appeal under Section 11 of the Act. Since the petitioners had an alternative remedy of appeal, the writ petition was not maintainable. The court dismissed the petition, leaving it open to the petitioners to pursue the appeal remedy. The judgment emphasized that the High Court should not exercise its writ jurisdiction when an efficacious alternative remedy exists.
Headnote
A) Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines Act, 1962 - Acquisition of Right of User - Compensation - Finality of Competent Authority's Order - The Competent Authority under Section 10 of the Act determines compensation, which is final subject to appeal under Section 11. The High Court held that the determination of compensation by the Competent Authority is not open to challenge in a writ petition when an alternative remedy of appeal is available. (Paras 1-5)
B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Alternative Remedy - The court reiterated that the High Court should not entertain a writ petition under Article 226 when the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy of appeal. The petition was dismissed on this ground. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition challenging the compensation determined by the Competent Authority under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioners are at liberty to pursue the remedy of appeal under Section 11 of the Act.
Law Points
- Acquisition of right of user in land
- Compensation determination
- Finality of Competent Authority's order
- Alternative remedy
- Writ jurisdiction
Case Details
Writ Petition No.1929 of 2002
H.S. Bedi, C.J., V.M. Kanade, J.
Mr. Shriaz Rustomjee with Mr. Ketan Gupta i/b Mr. Mustafa S. Motiwala for Petitioners, Mr. V.P. Malwankar, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents
Gas Authority of India Limited and Marianus Baa
State of Maharashtra, District Collector Raigad, Tahsildar Raigad
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging compensation determined by Competent Authority under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to challenge the compensation determined by the Competent Authority for acquisition of right of user in land.
Filing Reason
Petitioners were aggrieved by the compensation determined by the Competent Authority.
Previous Decisions
Competent Authority determined compensation under Section 10 of the Act.
Issues
Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available under Section 11 of the Act.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the compensation determined was inadequate.
Respondents contended that the petitioners had an alternative remedy of appeal and the writ petition should be dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi
The determination of compensation by the Competent Authority under Section 10 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 is final subject to an appeal under Section 11. The High Court should not entertain a writ petition under Article 226 when an efficacious alternative remedy is available.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioners - Gas Authority of India Limited made an application to the Central Government for acquisition of the rights of user in 17 villages under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962.
The determination of compensation by the Competent Authority is final subject to an appeal under Section 11 of the Act.
In view of the alternative remedy available to the petitioners, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition.
Procedural History
The petitioners filed a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay challenging the compensation determined by the Competent Authority under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962. The respondents opposed the petition on the ground of alternative remedy. The High Court dismissed the petition on 10 October 2006.
Acts & Sections
- Petroleum and Minerals Pipe-lines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962: Section 3, Section 10, Section 11
