JUDGMENT :

S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for respective parties, matters are taken up for final hearing.

2. The petitioners challenge the second award passed by respondent no. 3/competent authority and Sub-Divisional Officer, Land Acquisition.

3. All these writ petitions are based on similar set of facts and involve common question of law. To avoid rigmarole are decided by the common judgment.

4. In all these petitions, the petitioners are challenging the second award passed by the competent authority and Sub-Divisional Officer, Land Acquisition. For the sake of convenience the facts are taken from Writ Petition No. 1883 of 2018.

5. Initially, the first award was passed U/Sec. 3(G) of the National Highways Act, 1956 on or about 05.07.2017 and subsequently, the second award modifying/substituting the first award is passed on 01.08.2017.

6. Mr. Sapkal, learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously contends that respondent no. 3/competent authority and Sub-Divisional Officer, Land Acquisition has no jurisdiction and authority to pass subsequent award by modifying the first award. The provisions of the National Highways Ac