Gujarat High Court Allows Petitioners' Claim for Additional Compensation Under Section 30(3) of RFCTLARR Act, 2013 on Market Value Including Multiplication Factor-2. The Court held that 'market value' under Section 3(u) includes the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2), and additional compensation must be computed on that enhanced value.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, landowners whose land was acquired for railway purposes, challenged the award of additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the 2013 Act). The competent authority under the Railways Act, 1989 had awarded 12% additional compensation only on the base market value determined under Section 26(1), refusing to apply the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2) for the purpose of calculating additional compensation. The petitioners contended that the issue was already settled by a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 7561 of 2023 decided on 23.12.2025, which held that 'market value' as defined in Section 3(u) includes all components of Section 26, including the multiplication Factor-2. The Court, relying on its earlier decision, held that additional compensation under Section 30(3) must be calculated on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2. The Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to recompute the additional compensation accordingly within a specified period.

Headnote

A) Land Acquisition - Additional Compensation - Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Calculation of additional compensation @ 12% per annum - The issue was whether the additional compensation under Section 30(3) should be awarded on the base market value or on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2) - The Court held that 'market value' as defined in Section 3(u) means the value determined in accordance with Section 26, which includes the multiplication Factor-2, and therefore additional compensation under Section 30(3) is payable on the market value after applying Factor-2 (Paras 96-97).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 should be calculated on the base market value or on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2) of the Act.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to recompute the additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the 2013 Act on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2), within a specified period.

Law Points

  • Additional compensation under Section 30(3) is payable on the market value determined under Section 26
  • which includes the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2)
  • market value defined in Section 3(u) includes all components of Section 26
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026:GUJHC:16406-DB

R/Special Civil Application No. 2255 of 2026

2026-02-26

Sunita Agarwal, D.N.Ray

2026:GUJHC:16406-DB

Maulik G. Nanavati for Nanavati & Co., Maithili Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader, Ankit Shah

Pravinbhai Chimanbhai Patel & Ors.

Deputy Collector, Dabhoi and Special Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil writ petition challenging the calculation of additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013.

Remedy Sought

Direction to the respondents to award additional compensation under Section 30(3) on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2).

Filing Reason

The competent authority awarded additional compensation only on the base market value, excluding the multiplication Factor-2.

Previous Decisions

The issue was previously decided by the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 7561 of 2023 on 23.12.2025.

Issues

Whether additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 should be calculated on the base market value or on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2).

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued that the issue is settled by the decision in Special Civil Application No. 7561 of 2023, which held that 'market value' includes the multiplication Factor-2.

Ratio Decidendi

The term 'market value' as defined in Section 3(u) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 means the value determined in accordance with Section 26, which includes the multiplication Factor-2 under Section 26(2). Therefore, additional compensation under Section 30(3) must be calculated on the market value after applying the multiplication Factor-2.

Judgment Excerpts

Keeping in mind all the above noted principles of statutory interpretation, we have no reason to assign a different meaning to the word 'market value' than defined in Section 3(u) of the Act, which would mean 'the value of the land determined in accordance with Section 26 of the Act, 2013'.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed Special Civil Application No. 2255 of 2026 before the Gujarat High Court challenging the award of additional compensation. The Court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 26.02.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: 3(u), 26, 26(1), 26(2), 30(3)
  • Railways Act, 1989:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Retired Employee Seeking Modification of Annuity Option Under Post-Retirement Benefit Scheme. Option Once Exercised Under Super Annuation Benefit Fund Scheme Cannot Be Changed After Retirement, as It Would Affe...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Reduces Compensation in Motor Accident Claim Due to Contributory Negligence of Pillion Rider. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. v. B. Krishnappa Setty & Others, MFA No. 9140/2010 (MV) - Insurance company appeals aga...