1. The National Highways Authority of India has filed these batch of writ petitions challenging the supplementary awards passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Competent Authority, NH-4 (Mulbagal-Kolar-Bangalore Section), Kolar.

2. Respondent No.1 is the competent authority appointed by the Central Government for the purpose of carrying out the duties and functions pertaining to acquisition and determination of the amount payable as compensation in accordance with the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 (for short, ‘the Act’), for the relevant stretch of National Highway No.4 in Mulbagal-Kolar-Bangalore Section.

3. A notification under sub-section (1) of Section 3D of the Act came to be issued on 14.11.2007 acquiring various lands belonging to different owners who are arrayed as party respondents in these writ petitions.

4. Respondent No.1 – Competent Authority exercising his powers under sub-sections (1) to (4) of Section 3G of the Act passed an award on 28.06.2008 determining the market value and awarding compensation. However, subsequent to the passing of the award, a representation was made by the owners of the acquired lands stating that the acquired lands were situated within municipal limits and/or were converted for nonagricultural use and therefore, they were entitled for payment of market value admissible for non-agricultural lands. They enclosed documents evidencing the conversion and payment of development charges, etc.

5. Respondent No.1 – Competent Authority having considered the said representation and having verified the documents produced, has found that the lands in question were converted lands for non-agricultural purpose before the date they were acquired by issuing the notification under Section 3A of the Act on 14/18.12.2006 and hence the land owners were entitled for payment of compensation treating the lands as converted lands and not as agricultural lands. Accordingly, by examining several judgments of the Apex Court regarding valuation of land situated within municipal area near residential places and also regarding assessment of agricultural lands having urban potential situated adjacent to converted urban lands, he has passed the impugned supplementary award after inspecting the spot by recording a finding that the lands were entitled for assessment of compensation either as non-agricultural lands or lands having non-agricultural potentiality and awarded compensation by enhancing the market rate per square metre.

6. To appreciate it better, we may take the example of the land comprised in W.P.No.25048/2010 situated at Dandupalya village, Kasaba Hobli, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, comprised in Sy. No.145 measuring 4,265 sq. mtrs, Respondent No.1 has enhanced the compensation by passing the supplementary award and has fixed it at Rs.1,291.63 per sq. mtr. from Rs.988.40 per sq. mtr, awarded earlier on 28.06.2008. It is thus clear from the supplementary award passed in this case on 30.01.2010, that the enhanced amount of Rs.12,93,276/- is ordered to be paid over and above the compensation already determined. The extent of land involved and the rate determined in different cases obviously differ and it is not necessary to refer to each one of them.

7. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the supplementary awards passed are without authority of law, in as much as, respondent No.1 has no such power or jurisdiction to sit in judgment over his own award and pass a fresh award styling it as a supplementary award thereby enhancing the compensation payable. In this connection, Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a Full Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of KANCHANBHAI JHAVERBHAI DESAI & ANOTHER VS STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS – (1995)1 GLR 1956, wherein while dealing with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and the power of the Land Acquisition Officer to pass supplementary award, in paragraph 11, it is held that wi