Bhimashankar Co-operative Sugar Factory Limited vs The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer and Asst. Commissioner and Others

Gopala Gowda, J.—The petitioner is a Sugar Factory. For its benefit certain lands belonging to respondents 2 to 6 had been acquired. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the owners sought reference to Civil Court and by the impugned Judgment and Award the Reference Court enhanced the compensation. Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner has filed these Writ Petitions. The grievance of the petitioner is that it was not heard in the matter and hence the Judgment and Award are violative of principles of natural justice.

Counsel for the owners contends that against the award passed by the Reference Court, alternative remedy is available to the petitioner u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act and hence sought for dismissal of the Writ Petitions. The decision reported in Himalayan Tile and Marble (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Francis V. Coutinho and Others, is pressed into service to contend that the beneficiary is not entitled to seek to set aside the award passed u/s 18 of the Act.

The contention urged by the learned Counsel for the owners cannot be accepted and the decision relied upon cannot be applied to the case on hand in view of the Constitutional Bench decision reported in 1995(5) SC 724, wherein it is held that it is open for the beneficiary to invoke the jurisdiction either under Article 226 of the Constitution or avail the remedy provided under the Act.

Supreme Court in the decision reported in Neelagangabai and another Vs. State of Karnataka and others, since notice was not issued to the beneficiary, direction was issued to re-open the proceedings and to decide afresh after giving opportunity to the beneficiary.

For the reasons stated above, the impugned judgment and award is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Reference Court with a direction to give opportunity to the petitioner and dispose of the same within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The acquisition proceedings are of the year 1995 and the Award was of the year 1998. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to deposit 50% of the enhanced compensation within four weeks. If deposit is not made within the stipulated period, the benefit of this order will not enure to the petitioner.

These Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.