VEENA BIRBAL, J.

1. The present two petitions are filed by the petitioners seeking directions for quashing of review award no. 16/03-04 dated 14.07.2004 and for release of balance payment to the petitioners in respect of award no. 16/03-04 dated 01.10.2003 and supplementary award 16-A/04-05 dated 27.10.2004 along with interest and other consequential benefits and to forthwith make the reference filed by the petitioners to the civil court. The case of the petitioners is that petitioner no. 1 and Sh. Manoj Kumar were the owners of land forming part of khasra no. 17 min., 18/1 min., 18/2 min., 19 min. and 20/1 min., in all measuring 12 bighas and 5 biswas. A notification under Section 4 in respect of said land under Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as „the said Act?) was issued on 23.05.2002. The said notification was followed by a declaration under Section 6 along with Section 17(1) of the said Act on 17.12.2002. On 01.10.2003, respondent made an award bearing no. 16/03-04 in favour of petitioners. In October, 2003, 80% of the compensation as ascertained by the respondent i.e. Rs. 1,87,10,194/- was released to the petitioner no. 1 and Sh. Manoj Kumar out of total amount of Rs. 1,97,08,397/-. Balance amount of compensation of Rs. 9,98,203/- along with interest was not paid. Sh. Manoj Kumar expired on 06.09.2005. Petitioners no. 2 and 3 are the legal heirs of Sh. Manoj Kumar. Petitioners made various efforts to get the balance compensation released in their favour but the same was not released. On 11.10.2007, petitioners filed an application under Right to Information Act to know about supplementary award, if any, passed in the matter. No information was provided to petitioners. Ultimately, petitioner had to file an appeal before the appellate authority under Right to Information Act. Despite that, same was not provided. Petitioners filed Second Appeal before Central Information Commission under the aforesaid Act. On receipt of the said application, respondent furnished information vide letter dated 18.12.2007 that a supplementary award was passed in the matter on 27.10.2004 wherein compensation of trees was assessed in their favour. Thereafter, petitioner made representation for release of said compensation but the same was not released. On 18.03.2008, petitioner filed the present petition i.e. W.P.(C) No. 2185/2008 for the release of compensation in respect of supplementary award in their favour. Notice of the said petition was issued to respondents vide order dated 18.03.2008. In response to same, respondent filed counter affidavit stating that at the time of making award dated 01.08.2003, certain compensation was awarded in contravention of Section 24 of the Act as compensation for illegal super structure on the land of the petitioners was awarded whereas no compensation ought to have been awarded to them in respect of said structures. Accordingly, the review of earlier award dated 01.08.2003 was done and fresh Review award on 14.07.2004 was passed. On coming to know of the said stand of the respondent, petitioner filed the second writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) no. 381/2009 challenging the said Review Award.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that action of the respondent in making review award dated 01.10.2003 is illegal and in contravention of provisions of Section 12 of the said Act. It is contended that as soon as the award is pronounced and filed in the Collector's Office, the award becomes final and conclusive between the Collector and person interested. It is further contended that under the said Act, the power of review of the award has not been conferred upon any authority as such review award is illegal being contrary to statute. It is contended that review of the award can be done only under Section 13 A of the Act which permits removal of arithmetical and clerical errors within a period of six months. It is contended that beyond that, nothing can be done b