Case Note & Summary
The petitions were filed by farmers whose lands were acquired for the Jalna–Nanded Super Express Highway project. The landowners challenged the compensation proceedings and the subsequent award dated 29.09.2025 passed under the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955.The petitioners contended that after following the statutory procedure, including hearings and consideration of objections, the Land Acquisition Officer had already determined compensation on 02/03.09.2024 based on the original Joint Measurement Survey and valuation reports. This determination was approved by the District Level Committee on 04.10.2024 and accepted by the landowners. However, later, relying on directions issued in a review meeting held by the Chief Minister, the authorities ignored the earlier decision and proceeded to pass a fresh award based on another valuation report prepared using Google Earth/KML data.The petitioners argued that the Land Acquisition Officer performs a quasi-judicial function under Section 19B and that neither the Collector nor the State Government had authority to interfere with or review such determination. They also contended that the Act does not permit passing of a second award.The respondents submitted that disputes regarding valuation and compensation should be decided through arbitration under Section 19B(8) of the Act and that the earlier proceedings did not create any enforceable right.The Court examined the statutory scheme governing determination of compensation, the role of the District Level Committee, and the scope of judicial review in matters involving land acquisition compensation.
Headnote
LAND ACQUISITION – Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955 – Determination of compensation – Powers of Land Acquisition Officer – Role of District Level Committee – Validity of second award – Judicial interference – Petitioners/landowners challenged acquisition proceedings relating to Jalna–Nanded Super Express Highway and assailed subsequent award dated 29.09.2025 – Contention that compensation once determined by Land Acquisition Officer under Section 19B after hearing objections and accepted by District Level Committee in meeting dated 04.10.2024 attained finality – Further contention that Collector and State Government could not interfere with quasi-judicial determination by issuing administrative directions based on review meeting of Chief Minister – Allegation that second valuation report prepared on basis of Google Earth/KML data behind back of landowners was illegally relied upon – Petitioners argued that Maharashtra Highways Act does not contemplate review, second determination or second award and remedy against determination lies only by arbitration under Section 19B(8) – Respondents contended that order dated 02/03.09.2024 was not final determination/award and that disputes regarding valuation and compensation must be agitated before Arbitrator under statutory mechanism – Held, determination of compensation under Section 19B is a quasi-judicial exercise requiring notice, hearing and independent adjudication by Land Acquisition Officer – District Level Committee performs limited and recommendatory role under Government Resolutions dated 12.05.2015 and 29.05.2018 – Administrative authorities cannot assume appellate/revisional powers over statutory determination unless expressly conferred by statute – Questions relating to correctness of valuation, applicability of reports and adequacy of compensation ordinarily fall within domain of arbitration remedy under Section 19B(8) – Internal deliberations or incomplete minutes of District Level Committee do not by themselves create enforceable rights – Scope of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 limited where disputed questions regarding compensation are involved and statutory alternative remedy exists.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the decisions of the District Level Committee regarding compensation and rehabilitation in respect of land acquisition for the Jalna–Nanded Expressway project were arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013 and the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955, and whether the same warranted interference by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the land acquisition compensation process undertaken for the Jalna–Nanded Expressway project, holding that disputes relating to valuation and compensation are to be addressed through the statutory remedy of arbitration under Section 19B(8) of the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955, and that no interference under Article 226 was warranted.
Law Points
- Principles of judicial review in land acquisition matters
- Interpretation of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition
- Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act
- 2013 (RFCTLARR Act)
- Role of District Level Committees under Government Orders
- Doctrine of legitimate expectation
- Principles of natural justice including hearing and reasoned decisions
