RATTAN LAL Vs. STATE OF J & K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, successors-in-interest of late Bodh Raj, have filed the present appeal against the judgment and order dtd. 14.11.2017, passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition of the petitioner-Bodh Raj, was dismissed on the ground that the writ petition is not competent against the final award.

(2.) Mr. Vikram Sharma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants, has argued that the learned Single Judge has not appreciated the controversy in the right perspective. It was argued that the award was not challenged in the writ petition and the claim of the petitioner was only with regard to the entries made afterwards in the award, whereby the Collector Land Acquisition declined the amount assessed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner being 'interested person' in terms of the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act), was entitled to the compensation assessed by the Collector. Dismissal of the claim of the petitioner by the Collector was not warranted.

(3.) Mr. S.S. Nanda, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents has contended that the writ petition was not maintainable as the petitioner was required to avail the remedy as available in terms of Sec. 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, as the petitioner had raised a dispute with regard to the apportionment statement prepared by the Collector. The award having been finalized, the writ petition was otherwise, not competent.