Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellants' land was acquired by a notification dated 23.05.2002 under Section 4, followed by a declaration under Section 6 on 17.12.2002. The Land Acquisition Collector passed an Award No.16/0304 dated 01.10.2003 awarding compensation of Rs.1,97,08,397, out of which Rs.1,87,10,194 was paid to the appellants, leaving a balance of Rs.9,98,203 plus interest. Subsequently, on 14.07.2004, the Collector passed a Review Award reducing the compensation by Rs.49,39,195 on the ground that compensation ought not to have been awarded for alleged illegal structures. The appellants were unaware of this Review Award. Meanwhile, a Supplementary Award dated 27.10.2004 was passed in favour of the appellants for Rs.45,36,781.64 towards compensation for trees on the acquired land. The appellants filed Writ Petition (C) No.2185 of 2008 seeking release of compensation under the Supplementary Award. Upon learning of the Review Award through an RTI application, they filed Writ Petition (C) No.381 of 2009 challenging it. Both writ petitions were dismissed by the Delhi High Court on 04.03.2010. The legal issue was whether the Land Acquisition Collector could review an award under the Act, particularly under Section 13A. The appellants argued that the Award dated 01.10.2003 had become final under Section 12 and could not be reviewed, as Section 13A only permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes within six months. The respondent contended that a mistake in awarding compensation for illegal structures could be corrected at any time, and the Review Award was passed on instructions from higher authorities. The Supreme Court analyzed Section 13A and held that it only allows correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes within six months from the date of the award, not substantive review. The Court noted that the Review Award reduced compensation based on a determination of legality of structures, which required evidence and could not be termed a clerical error. Relying on Kalabharati Advertising vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania (2010) 9 SCC 437, the Court reiterated that the power of review must be conferred by statute, and in its absence, any review order is ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The Court allowed the appeals, quashed the Review Award dated 14.07.2004 and the High Court's order dated 04.03.2010, and directed that the appellants are entitled to compensation as per the original Award dated 01.10.2003 and the Supplementary Award dated 27.10.2004.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Review of Award - Section 13A Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The Collector passed a Review Award reducing compensation on ground that illegal structures were wrongly included - Held that Section 13A only permits correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes within six months, not substantive review - Review Award quashed (Paras 1, 8-10). B) Land Acquisition - Finality of Award - Section 12 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Award under Section 11 becomes final upon filing in Collector's office - Held that once final, it cannot be reviewed in absence of statutory provision - Review Award set aside (Paras 11-12). C) Administrative Law - Power of Review - Statutory Interpretation - Power of review must be expressly or impliedly conferred by statute - Held that in absence of such provision, review order is ultra vires and without jurisdiction - Relied on Kalabharati Advertising vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania (2010) 9 SCC 437 (Paras 12-13).
Issue of Consideration
Whether under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after the passing of the Award under Section 11, the Award could be reviewed under any of the provisions of the Act, specially under Section 13A.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, quashed the Review Award No.16/0304 dated 14.07.2004 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector and the order dated 04.03.2010 passed by the Delhi High Court in Writ Petition (C) No.2185 of 2008 and Writ Petition (C) No.381 of 2009. The appellants are entitled to compensation as per the Award dated 01.10.2003 and the Supplementary Award dated 27.10.2004. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Review of award not permissible under Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 13A only allows correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes within six months
- Award becomes final under Section 12
- Power of review must be conferred by statute
