B. SUDERSHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE land belonging to the petitioners in Sy. No. 205/2 situated at Hasgul Village of Bichkunda Mandal of Nizamabad District were acquired along with other lands under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act ) for a public purpose for formation of road from Bichkunda to Dongli village. The notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was published in the Official Gazette on 4-4-1994. The Land Acquisition Officer passed a common award vide proceedings dated 6-6-1996 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 10,500. 00 (not clear) per acre and a solatium at 30% and additional market value in accordance with Section 23 (1-A) of the Act. The Land Acquisition Officer also awarded interest at 6% per annum on the compensation and solatium from the date of taking advance possession till the date of passing of the award and at 9% per annum for one year and 15% per annum thereafter on the market value and solatium. The award has been passed for a total sum of Rs. 14,55,515. 00 in respect of the entire extent of Ac. 26-04 guntas, but only a sum of Rs. 2,39,154. 00 has been paid proportionately as first instalment due to lack of funds. The petitioners and other claimants have received the amount to lack of funds. The petitioners and other claimants have received the amount under protest and sought for a reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Officer has referred the matter to the Civil Court and the same is stated to be pending in O. P. No. 43 of 1996 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan.

( 2 ) THE petitioners were constrained to file Writ Petition No. 13985 of 1996, as the respondents failed to deposit the balance of compensation under the award passed by the-land Acquisition Officer. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 19-9-1996 directing the respondents to deposit the compensation and accordingly the balance amount has been deposited on 13-3-1997. The second respondent is stated to have disbursed only a sum of Rs. 7,60,471/- and kept the remaining amount unpaid without any intimation whatsoever. The petitioners got issued a legal notice on 2-4-1997 calling upon the second respondent herein to make the payment of balance amount also. However, there was no response whatsoever from the respondent.

( 3 ) HOWEVER, the petitioners have learnt that the second respondent reviewed the award resulting in certain modification with regard to payment of rate of interest and also interest on solatium. The Land Acquisition Officer accordingly modified the award refusing to grant any interest on the solatium and also awarding interest at the rate of 7 1/2% per annum from the date of advance possession taken to the date of the award. The Land Acquisition Officer accordingly withheld a sum of Rs. 4,55,890. 00being the amount granted towards interest at the rate specified in the award including the interest on solatium. It is the said review of the award which is under challenge in this writ petition.

( 4 ) SRI F. Tulasi Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioners strenuously contends that the Land Acquisition Officer has no jurisdiction whatsoever to review his own award for whatsoever reason. The Act does not confer any such jurisdiction upon the Land Acquisition Officer to review the award once passed. It is further urged by the learned Counsel that the Land Acquisition Officer at the most could correct the arithmetical or typographical error in exercise of the power under Section 13-A of the Act. The learned Counsel submits that in the instant case, the Land Acquisition Officer reviewed the whole award relating to the award of interest. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition Sri P. Rajagopal Rao submits that the Land Acquisition Officer has committed serious irregularity in awarding interest on solatium and also 9% per annum from the date of advance possession instead of awarding interest at 7 1/2% per annum

Click Here to Read the rest of this document