KURIAN JOSEPH, R.BANUMATHI
Bharatsing – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
What is the course to be adopted by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 28A of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 when the award on which enhancement is sought is pending in appeal? How to determine whether successive applications under Section 28A are permissible in light of pending appeals and final appellate judgments? What is the proper remedy when a Section 28A application is decided while the related appeal is pending, and how should fresh applications be treated in light of final judgments?
Key Points: - (!) The case concerns the course of action for a Land Acquisition Collector under Section 28A when the supplemental award is based on an award pending in appeal. - (!) Section 28A allows re-determination of compensation on the basis of an award of the Court if certain conditions are met. - (!) Generally, successive applications under Section 28A are not permissible, but the Collector should stay redetermination pending final decision of the appellate forum to avoid incongruity. - (!) The Collector erred by deciding a Section 28A application dated 25.10.2000 while related appeals were pending, and the appropriate action is to keep such applications pending and await final appellate judgment. - (!) The Court directed afresh consideration of the Section 28A application dated 31.12.1992 in light of the High Court judgment dated 23.03.2009, with amounts already paid to be adjusted. - (!) The final benefit to claimants should arise only after the appellate forum's final decree, and fresh orders must be issued within a specified short timeframe. - (!) The requirement that applicants who accept or refuse final Court-ordered compensation be treated consistently with the final award and potential refunds of excess amounts. - (!) The principle that the final decree of the appellate court determines the basis for any redetermination to avoid divergent outcomes. - (!) The decision cites Babua Ram and Kendriya Karamchari Sehkari Grah Nirman Samiti for guidance on pendency and applicability of Section 28A. - (!) No costs were awarded in the judgment.
JUDGMENT
Kurian Joseph, J.
Leave granted.
2. What is the course to be adopted by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 28A of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), when the award based on which enhancement is sought is pending in appeal, is the issue arising for consideration in this case.
3. The Section 4(1) Notification was issued on 17.01.1974. The compensation was determined by the Land Acquisition Officer on 04.06.1977. The appellants did not pursue the matter further under Section 18 of the Act in Reference. However, other claimants of the lands covered by the same Section 4(1) Notification took up the matter further and the Reference Court allowed enhancement and fixed the land value at Rs.5,000/- per acre in the place of Rs.3,000/3,500 offered by the Land Acquisition Officer, as per the award dated 01.10.1992 in LAR Nos. 123 and 129 of 1983 on the file of the Second Additional District Judge, Aurangabad. The appellants filed an application on 31.12.1992 under Section 28A of the Act seeking similar enhancement within the period of three months as required under Section 28A.
4. While the application under Section 28A of the Act was pending,
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.