Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, legal heirs of Balwant Kannav, challenged the order dated 31.03.1999 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Yavatmal, rejecting their application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for enhanced compensation. The land of the predecessor was acquired for the Arunavati project vide L.A.C. No.5/47/83-84, and the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 31.03.1986. Another landowner, Shamrao Jadhav, whose land was acquired under the same notification, filed a reference under Section 18 and the reference court enhanced compensation to Rs.22,500/- per hectare on 02.11.1990. Balwant filed an application under Section 28A on 23.01.1991 seeking similar enhancement. The Special Land Acquisition Officer rejected the application on 31.03.1999 on the ground that it was barred by limitation. The petitioners contended that the application was within limitation as it was filed within three months from the date of the reference court award. They also argued that the order was passed without giving them any notice or opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. The court examined the provisions of Section 28A and found that the application was filed within the prescribed period of three months from the date of the reference court award. The court also noted that the impugned order did not indicate any notice or hearing given to the applicant before rejection. The court held that the order was unsustainable both on merits and for violation of natural justice. The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 31.03.1999, and remanded the matter to the Special Land Acquisition Officer for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The court directed that the application be decided afresh within three months from the date of the order.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Section 28A Application - Limitation - The application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, must be filed within three months from the date of the award of the reference court. The court held that the application filed on 23.01.1991 was within limitation as the reference court award was dated 02.11.1990. (Paras 2-4) B) Land Acquisition - Natural Justice - Right of Hearing - The Special Land Acquisition Officer rejected the application without giving any notice or opportunity of hearing to the applicant. The court held that such rejection violates principles of natural justice and the order is liable to be set aside. (Paras 5-6) C) Land Acquisition - Section 28A - Rejection of Application - The order dated 31.03.1999 rejecting the application under Section 28A was passed without considering the merits and without hearing the applicant. The court set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioners. (Paras 6-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special Land Acquisition Officer was justified in rejecting the application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the ground of limitation without affording an opportunity of hearing to the applicant.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 31.03.1999 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Special Land Acquisition Officer for fresh consideration of the application under Section 28A after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The application shall be decided afresh within three months from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Limitation for filing application under Section 28A
- Natural justice in quasi-judicial proceedings
- Right to hearing before rejection of application
