JUDGMENT

1. With the consent of the lear ned counsel appearing for the parties, this writ petition was finally heard.

2. The petitioner has filed this petition for quashing order No.

502/1683/12/NH/Smb/6886 dated 28.03.2012 passed by the respondent No. 2, whereby he has rejected the claim of the petitioner for entitlement to compensation in respect of land measuring 2 Kanals 6 Marlas comprising survey No. 662/417 situated at Village Sangwali, Tehsil and District Samba, with further prayer for directing the respondents to pay compensation at the prevalent market rate to the petitioner in respect of land mentioned above.

3. The petitioner has sought the abovementioned reliefs on the ground that the respondents for the purpose of constructing/expanding National Highway, acquired the land of the petitioner measuring 02 Kanals 6 Marlas comprising survey No. 662/417 situated at Village Sangwali, Tehsil and District Samba and final award dated 18.04.2011 was also issued by the respondent No. 2 but the petitioner was not paid the compensation as determined in the final award on the ground that his name was not reflected as owner in the revenue record. It is stated that the petitioner submitted a representation with the respondent No. 3 that he was recorded as owner in respect of the land, and it was the Patwari concerned who for the apparent reasons did not reflect the name of the petitioner in the revenue records. It is further pleaded that to the dismay of the petitioner compensation pertaining to the land owned by the petitioner was deposited by the respondent No. 3 in District Treasury vide T. R. No. 1 dated 06.05.2011. The representation submitted by the petitioner was forwarded by the respondent No. 3 to the respondent No. 4 on 14.12.2011 and he was directed to investigate the matter. The said representation was further marked to the Patwari concerned by the respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 4 vide his communication dated 28.02.2012 addressed to the respondent No. 2 stated that had the entry of the mutation been entered in the record before initiating acquisition proceedings, the compensation would not have been deposited under account head of land revenue being the state land. It was also stated in the said communication that mutation has been attested on 06.02.2008 and the acquisition proceedings were initiated subsequently. Accordingly, the respondent No. 4 recommended the the case of the petitioner for disbursement of compensation. However, the respondent No. 5 under the instruction of respondent No. 2, vide his communication dated 28.03.2012 rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the compensation could not be released in favour of the occupant, even if he has been vested with the ownership rights post facto. The petitioner claims to have made numerous representations to the respondents but nothing was done and ultimately the respondent No. 3 referred the case to the learned Principal District Judge, Samba under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act for disposal under law, but the learned Principal District Judge, Samba rejected the reference under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act on the ground that the acquisition proceedings had concluded and the amount was required to be paid to the land owners.

4. The respondent Nos. 1 to 6 have filed the response, stating therein that land measuring 2 Kanals 6 Marlas comprising survey No. 662/417 besides other Khasra numbers situated at Village Sangwali, Tehsil and District Samba was acquired for public purpose i.e. for widening of National Highway vide final award issued under No. DCS/NHW/LAS/ACR/11-12 dated 18.04.2011. Compensation in respect of said Khasra numbers amounting to Rs. 15,87,000/- was deposited in the District Treasury vide T. R. No. 1 dated 06.05.2011 under the account Head No. 0029LR as the said land was reflected as state land in the revenue records. It is further stated that the petitioner’s name was reflected in the final award as a “tenant”