Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from the acquisition proceedings under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, whereby respondent no.6 acquired a limited right of user over an area of 1,570 square meters out of the petitioners' total land admeasuring 18,716 square meters in survey no.79, village Abheta, Taluka Vagra, District Bharuch. The acquisition was made vide notification dated 14-12-1995 under Section 3 of the Act. The petitioners, who are the landowners, contended that the 1962 Act confers only a restricted right of user and does not transfer ownership, meaning they remained absolute owners except to the extent of the notified user rights. They alleged that after the pipeline was laid over the acquired area, the respondents, without any further acquisition or compensation, unlawfully encroached upon and occupied the remaining land admeasuring 17,146 square meters by constructing a wall and laying additional underground pipelines. The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing respondent no.6 not to enter the excess land and to restore possession. The court, at the first hearing on 25-11-2025, found the averments in the petition vague and directed the filing of an additional affidavit. The additional affidavit dated 01-12-2025, however, also contained vague statements, merely repeating that the respondents had illegally entered upon the land for laying additional pipelines, and that the petitioner became aware of the encroachment only on 01-10-2025 during a routine inspection; no specific details of the alleged encroachment or the nature of the additional constructions were provided. The issue before the court was whether such vague pleadings could sustain a claim for mandamus. The court observed that the averments regarding illegal entry into the unacquired portion were vague and unsubstantiated, and thus no relief could be granted. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. However, the court granted liberty to the petitioners to avail civil remedies as available in law or to approach the Collector for redressal of their grievance, if any.
Headnote
A) Right of User - Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 - Section 3 - Limited Right of User - The acquisition under the 1962 Act confers only a restricted right of user on the company, while the landowners retain ownership and all incidents of ownership except to the extent of the user rights notified; no transfer of title occurs. Held that this legal position was acknowledged (Paras 3,4). B) Writ Petition - Pleadings - Vague Averments - Constitution of India, Article 226 - A writ of mandamus requires clear and specific averments to establish a legal right; vague and general allegations of encroachment without concrete details are insufficient to grant relief. Held that the petition was dismissed due to vague pleadings, with liberty to pursue civil remedies or approach the Collector (Paras 6-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondent company not to enter upon their land beyond the acquired area and to restore possession, given the vague and unsubstantiated allegations of encroachment
Final Decision
The petition was dismissed as no good ground was made out. Liberty was granted to the petitioners to avail civil remedies as available in law or to approach the Collector for redressal of their grievance, if any.
Law Points
- Under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act
- 1962
- acquisition confers only a limited right of user and does not transfer ownership
- landowners retain all incidents of ownership except to the extent of the user rights notified
- Writ petitions under Article 226 require clear and specific averments
- vague allegations cannot justify grant of mandamus
