Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Piyushbhai Kanchanbhai Patel and others, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Gujarat High Court challenging the non-award of benefits under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the 2013 Act). The dispute arose from land acquisition proceedings under the Railways Act, 1989, where the competent authority awarded additional compensation at 12% per annum only on the base market value determined under Section 26(1) of the 2013 Act, excluding the multiplication factor of 2 provided under Section 26(2). The petitioners contended that the additional compensation should be calculated on the market value after applying the multiplication factor. The respondents, the Prant Officer, Karjan and Special Land Acquisition Officer, and another, argued that the additional compensation was payable only on the base market value. The Court, relying on its earlier decision in Special Civil Application No. 7561 of 2023 and cognate petitions decided on 23.12.2025, held that the term 'market value' as defined in Section 3(u) of the 2013 Act means the value determined in accordance with Section 26, which includes the multiplication factor under Section 26(2). Consequently, the additional compensation under Section 30(3) must be computed on the market value after applying the multiplication factor. The Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to recalculate and pay the additional compensation accordingly.
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 - Computation of additional compensation @ 12% per annum - The issue was whether the additional compensation under Section 30(3) should be calculated on the base market value under Section 26(1) or on the market value after applying the multiplication factor 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 under Section 26(2). Therefore, additional compensation under Section 30(3) must be computed on the market value after applying the multiplication factor. (Paras 96, 2-3)
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 under Section 26(1) or on the market value after applying the multiplication factor under Section 26(2).
Final Decision
The Court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to recalculate the additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 on the market value after applying the multiplication factor under Section 26(2) and pay the same to the petitioners.
Law Points
- Market value under Section 3(u) includes multiplication factor under Section 26(2)
- Additional compensation under Section 30(3) computed on market value as determined under Section 26
- Interpretation of 'market value' in land acquisition statutes
