http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: NANAKCHAND PYARMAL & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT28/11/1995

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, S.B. MAJMUDAR

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      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 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 the said award and  decree, the State carried First Appeal No.1038/88 which was  admitted on February 16, 1989 and ad interim 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  (1) on  February 2, 1988 for redetermination of the amount  of compensation  to 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 respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court. A  Division Bench  of the  High Court by the impugned order dated  August 24,  1992 directed  the Land 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   reference application made under Section 28A (1) 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. The  writ petition  stands dismissed subject to the above direction.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2