VIJAYADEVI NAVALKISHORE BHARTIA Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) LEAVE granted.

(3.) IT is against this order of the Commissioner made under the proviso to Section 11 (1) of the Act that the appellants filed a writ petition before the High Court of Mumbai, Nagpur Bench, contending that the Commissioner acting under the proviso to Section 11 (1) of the Act had no jurisdiction to reappreciate the material found in the records of the Collector as an appellate authority. IT was also contended that the authority of the Commissioner acting under the said provision of law was only to approve or not to approve the award made by the Land Acquisition Officer (the Collector). The High Court rejected this contention holding that the Commissioner under the Act, when required to give prior approval for the award, can reappreciate the material relied on by the Collector, hence the High Court held that the order of the Commissioner did not call for interference, hence, dismissed the writ petition. The High Court also held that if the appellants were aggrieved by the reduction in the market value, they could approach the reference Court under Section 18 of the Act.