EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this group of writ petitions the petitioner acquiring body is raising challenge to the judgment and award dt. 16-10-2005 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Jaikwadi Project no. 2, Aurangabad under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act.

(2.) The petitioner contends that the lands belonging to the claimants came to be acquired for Narangi Sarangi Medium Project, Vaijapur. The possession of lands has already been taken by the acquiring body. After following the procedure laid down under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, the Special Land Acquisition Officer passed award on 30-9-1996. Under the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the amount of compensation payable to the claimants was fixed between the range of Rs.325/- to Rs.690/- per arc. One of the claimants whose land was acquired by the State for the said project preferred reference application bearing LAR no. 16/96. The other claimants also relied upon the similar judgment wherein the award came to be passed by the reference court, bearing different numbers. The fact remains that various reference applications were preferred before the reference court which arose out of the same section 4 notification and same award and were decided by the reference court wherein the land value payable to the claimants was enhanced ranging between Rs.772/- to Rs.1000/- per arc. The claimants seeking to derive benefit of decision rendered by the reference court preferred application under the provisions of section 28-A of the Act requesting the Collector to re-determine the amount of compensation payable to the claimants on the basis of the judgment and award passed by the reference court. The applications tendered by the claimants under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act were considered favourably by the Special Land Acquisition Officer who was pleased to direct enhancement in the amount of compensation payable to the claimants on the basis of the judgment and award passed by the reference court on which reliance was placed by the claimants. The said judgment and award passed in pursuance to the applications under section 28-A of the Act is subject matter of challenge in the instant writ petitions.

(3.) Shri Sonwalkar, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the acquiring body was not impleaded as party to the applications tendered to the Collector under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act and as such the judgment and award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is vitiated and does not bind the acquiring body. Learned counsel for the petitioner is seeking to place reliance on a judgment in the matter of Agra Development Authority vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer reported in (2001) 1 Supreme Court Cases 646. The learned counsel further contends that the judgment and award passed in favour of the claimants in the absence of the acquiring body is vitiated and does not bind the acquiring body. It is contended that the award under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer therefore is liable to be quashed and set aside.