AKBARMIYA AMIRMIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main point in focus, in this group of petitions, is as to whether the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the provisions of section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act for short) pertaining to redetermination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. Since all the petitioners have claimed the benefit of the provisions of section 28-A of the Act, and common questions are involved in this group of petitions, therefore, upon request, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioners had requested the respondent authority for redetermination of the amount of compensation obtained by them on the basis of the consent award declared on 24.2.88 under section 11(2) of the Act, on the strength of the subsequent award of the Court under section 18(1) declared on 13.2.89. The respondent authority declined the request of the petitioners, inter alia, on the ground that they are not entitled to the benefit of the provisions of section 28-A of the Act and, also, on the ground that in view of condition No.4 of the agreement between the parties, the petitioners after making agreement and resultant award based on that, under section 11(2), not entitled to make reference under section 18 of the Act. The following admitted facts may be highlighted.

(3.) That is how, the petitioners have, now come up before this Court challenging its legality and validity by filing this group of petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties. We have, also, examined the factual profile and the legal landscape relevant to the issue in focus. Section 28-A of the Act is introduced with a specific design and desideratum to provide for redetermination of amount of compensation and for that purpose to empower the Court to re-determine the amount of compensation on the basis of award of the Court. It reads as under: