Rajpal and Another vs State of Haryana and Others

Laxmi Narain Mittal, J.—Land owners have filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning order dated 18.10.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Karnal (in short - Land Acquisition Collector) on petition filed by the petitioner u/s 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short - the Act), thereby allowing said application filed by the petitioners and holding the petitioners entitled to compensation for their acquired land at the same rate, as awarded by the Reference Court in petition u/s 18 of the Act, filed by some other land owners relating to the same acquisition. Petitioners have filed this revision petition for further enhancement of compensation for their acquired land. I have heard counsel for the parties on the question of maintainability of the instant revision petition. I have also perused the case file.

Land Acquisition Collector is neither Court nor Tribunal subordinate to this Court, and is, therefore, not amenable to power of superintendence of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, the instant revision petition under Article 227 is not maintainable.

In addition to the aforesaid, the petitioner also had alternative efficacious remedy of seeking reference to the Court, in view of Section 28-A(3) read with Section 18 of the Act. For this reason also, the instant petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case, the instant revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty to the petitioners to avail of any other remedy, that may be available to them, in accordance with law.