J
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
v.
NANAKCHAND PYARMAL AND ORS.
NOVEMBER 22, 1995
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894:
S.28A(l)-Reference application-Award subject matter of appeal
pending in the High Court-Collector to take action only on the basis of the
judgment that might be rendered-Directions issued.
A
B
c
For certain lands acquired under a notification u/s. 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, the Collector made the award and paid compensation
which was accepted by the respondents without protest. One of the D
claimants covered under the same notification sought reference under
section 18 and the District Judge, enhanced the compensation to Rs. 10
per square meter. The State's appeal against the award was admitted and
ad interim stay of the award and decree of the District Court was granted
subject to certain conditions. Thereafter the respondents filed an applica-
E
tion under section 28A(l) for redetermination for the amount of compen-
sation to their lands on the basis of the said award of the District Judge.
The Collector made a draft award and referred the matter to the State
Government for approval. At that stage the respondents filed a writ
petition in the High Court, which directed the Land Acquisition Officer to
declare the award by the end of November 1992. Hence this appeal.
Disposing of the appeal, this Court
F
HELD : In view of the fact that the award of the Reference Court is
already the subject matter of the appeal pending decision in the High G
Court, appropriate course would be to keep the reference application
made under section 28A(l) of the Land Acquisition Act pending till
disposal of the appeal in the High Court. The Collector shall take action
only on the basis of the judgment that may be rendered by the High Court.
Until then, the matter be kept pending. [580-H; 581-A]
H
579
580
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 5 S.C.R.
A
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11425 of"
1995.
From the Judgm~nt and Order dated 24.8.92 of the Bombay High
Court in W.P. No. 1802 of 1992.
B
S.M. Jadhav and D.M. Nargolkar for the Appellant.
c
U.N. Bachawat, Dr. R.B. Nargolkar and K.L. Taneja for the Respon-
dents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Leave granted.
We have heard learned counsel on both sides. Notification under
section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on February 4, 1970
acquiring a large extent of land. The Collector made the award and paid
D compensation which was accepted by the respondents without protest. It
would appear that one of the claimants covered under the same notification
sought reference under. section 18 and the District Judge, Raigarh at
Alibag in Reference No. 183/86 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 10 per
square meter by his award and decree dated November 6, 1987. Against
E the said award and decree, the State carried First Appeal No. 1038/88
which was admitted on February 16, 1989 and ad iiitelim stay of the award
and decree of the District Court was granted subject to certain conditions.
The respondents thereon filed an application under section 28A(l)
on February 2, 1988 for redetermination of the amount of compensation to
F
their lands on the basis of the said award of the District Judge. It would
appear from the record that the Collector made a draft award and referred
the matter to the State Government for approval. At that stage the respon-
dents filed a writ petition in the High Court. A Division Bench of the High
Court by the impugned order dated August 24, 1922 directed the Land
G Acquisition Officer to declare the award by the end of November 1992.
Thus this appeal by special leave.
In view of the fact that the award of the Reference Court, referred
to hereinbefore, is already the subject matter of the appeal pending
decision in the High Court, appropriate course would be to keep the
H reference application made under section 28A(l) pending till disposal of
\
STATE v. NANAK.CHAND PYARMAL
581
the appeal in the High Court. The Collector shall take action only on the A
basis of the judgment that may be rendered by the High Court. Until then,
the matter be kept pending. The writ petition stands dismissed subject to
the above direction.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
B
G.N.
Appeal disposed of.
Lex