CW 6240/07 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.6240/2007 Smt. Mangali Versus Prescribed Authority Gas Authority India Ltd. Jaipur & Others Date of Order ::: 08/05/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Rajesh Sharma, for petitioner Instant petition has been filed seeking enhancement of compensation awarded vide order dt.13/07/2007 (Ann.1) whereby District Judge, Jaipur district partly allowed in Compensation Application No.72/03 filed U/s 10(2) of the Petroleum & Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land) Act, 1962 (“the Act”) holding that petitioner is entitled to get compensation of Rs.95,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of presentation of application (10/09/2003) as against Rs.3,150/- awarded by order dt.25/06/03 of the Prescribed Authority, Gas Authority of India Ltd, Jaipur. It appears that GAIL India Ltd (respondent NO.2) got erected gas pipelines through agricultural lands bearing Khasra No.1055 & 1056 which were in Khatedari rights of petitioner – as a result whereof, 30 grafted emblic (Aanwle), 2 Khejre, one Margo & Acacia (Babool) trees were removed from his agricultural CW 6240/07 //2// field causing damages thereto and loss of fruits out of its sale proceeds; against which compensation of Rs.3,150/- was determined by Prescribed Authority (respondent NOI.1) under its Award dt.25/06/03, and being dis-satisfied therewith, the petitioner challenged it by way of application U/s 10(2) of the Act, 1962 before the District Judge. The District Judge, in course of inquiry after framing Ten issues based on pleadings & affording opportunity to respective parties, taking note of and appreciation of material on record, finally enhanced compensation from Rs. 3,150/- to Rs.95,000/- and awarded interest @ 9% per annum from 10/09/2003 till realisation of compensation vide judgment dt.13/07/07. Having considered and examined material on record, this Court does not any manifest error of law which may call for interference in judgment impugned. Consequently, writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.2/6240CW07May08Ds.doc