Unauthorized LPG Pipeline Deprives Rights Under Article 300A Constitution: Gujarat High Court Directs GAIL To Acquire Land & Pay 2019 Market Value Compensation
The Bench noted that GAIL illegally utilized private agricultural land without acquisition under Petroleum & Minerals Pipelines Act, 1962; directed compensation to be calculated as on the filing date of the writ petition.
The Gujarat High Court has directed GAIL (India) Limited to initiate statutory acquisition proceedings under the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962, and determine compensation based on the market value of the land as of March 27, 2019 (the date the writ petition was filed). The Court held that GAIL's unauthorized utilization of private land for laying an underground LPG pipeline, without initiating due acquisition proceedings, constituted an illegal deprivation of the landowners' constitutional rights protected under Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
Recognizing that the operational pipeline was laid in 2007–2008 and supplies cooking LPG as part of a critical national supply network, the Court declined to order its physical removal. However, addressing the state agency's failure to follow due process, the Bench observed that administrative oversight or logistical difficulties in acquiring adjacent lands cannot justify trespassing onto private property. The Court emphasized that while operational projects of national importance should not be disrupted, the illegal encroachment by a public authority cannot be regularized without providing full acquisition compensation to the affected landowners.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice D.N. Ray observed, “…the illegality committed by the respondent No.2, Gail (India) Ltd., cannot be regularised, inasmuch as, the petitioners have been deprived of their right of full utilisation of lands-in-question, a right protected under the Constitution of India by virtue of Article 300A…As the pipelines have been laid in the year 2007-2008 and they are LPG Pipelines connecting a major parts of the country, we do not find it feasible to grant the first prayer in the writ petition for removal of pipelines though illegally laid by the respondent No.2 Gail (India) Ltd.. However, to compensate the petitioners, an acquisition is required to be initiated by the respondent Gail (India) Ltd. treating the date of filling of the writ petition, as 27.03.2019 to be the date of Section 3A notification, for the purposes of determination of the market value of the lands-inquestion…”.
Advocate Vaibhav B. Shukla appeared for the petitioners and Hetal Patel, AGP appeared for the respondent.
In the matter, the petitioners who owned agricultural land, under a 1998 notification issued under Section 6 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines Act, 1962, GAIL acquired rights of user over neighboring land parcels for the Jamnagar-Loni Pipeline (JNPL) project. However, when executing the project nearly ten years later in 2007–2008, GAIL encountered permanent structures on the originally notified land. Consequently, GAIL diverted the alignment and laid the 6-inch pipeline through the petitioners' unacquired land without their knowledge or consent.
The petitioners discovered the underground pipeline in 2016 when applying for non-agricultural (NA) permission, which was subsequently verified by a District Inspector Land Records (DILR) report.
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Gujarat seeking a writ of mandamus directing GAIL to remove the pipeline, pay ₹86,00,000 as mesne profits and damages, and quash a subsequent Section 6(1) notification dated December 6, 2018, issued to acquire rights for a parallel 8-inch pipeline. GAIL filed an affidavit acknowledging that it had laid the pipeline on the petitioners' land in 2007–2008 due to obstacles on the originally notified land, but contended that removal was technically unfeasible as the operational pipeline supplies cooking LPG under the Prime Minister Ujjwala Scheme.
The High Court observed that GAIL’s explicit admission confirmed the illegal utilization of the petitioners' land without following due process under the 1962 Act. The Bench emphasized that if the original route was unfeasible, GAIL was obligated to issue fresh statutory notifications before laying pipes on alternative private property. On the secondary challenge to the 2018 acquisition notification for the parallel pipeline, the Court held that no valid grounds were made out to invalidate the notification, leaving it open to the petitioners to seek compensation or file a statutory appeal before the competent authority.
The Court disposed of the writ petition without costs, directing GAIL and the competent authority to complete the acquisition process for the 2007–2008 pipeline under the 1962 Act within three months.
Cause Title: Ushaben Harilal Nandha & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026:GUJHC:50287-DB)
Appearances:
Petitioners: Vaibhav B. Shukla, Advocate.
Respondents: Kshitij M. Amin, Vishwas K. Shah, Hetal Patel, AGP, Masoom K. Shah, Advocates.