AFZAL BEE Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The lands in survey Nos. 46, 56, 57, 59, 60, 355-A, 722, 723, 849 and 8087 have been acquired by the Government. According to the petitioner, she is entitled to a 1/4th share in the lands and, therefore, she is entitled to 1/4th share of the amount of the compensation. She claims to have filed a petition before the Land Acquisition Officer. That was made prior to the award of the amount of compensation. She complains that despite her claim, the Land Acquisition Officer appears to have passed an award in favour of respondents 2, 3 and 6 only. From the counter it is seen that the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award in regard to survey Nos. 46, 57, 59 and 60 only and in regard to the other items he referred the dispute regarding title under S. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the dispute in regard to survey Nos. 46, 57, 59 and 60 should have also been referred to the Court under S. 30 of the Act. He alleges that the Land Acquisition Officer was not competent to adjudicate upon the question of title in regard to these items. I see no force in this submission.

(2.) Under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Land Acquisition Officer is required to make an award as regards (i) the true area of the land, (ii) the compensation which in his opinion should be allowed for the land, and (iii) the apportionment of the said compensation amount among all the persons known or believed to be interested in the land, of whom, or of whose claims, he has information, whether or not they have respectively appeared before him.

(3.) Section 29 provides that where there are several persons interested, if such persons agree in the apportionment of the compensation, the particulars of such apportionment shall be specified in the award.