NOORALAM Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to a Notification issued under S. 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') and final declaration published under S. 6(1), 15 acres and 5 guntas of land in Sy. No. 114/1, Kavadimatti Village, Taluk Muddebihal and Dist. Vijayapura was acquired for public purpose. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer, UKP, Alamatti - respondent No. 2, passed an Award, on 28.02.2016, U/s. 11 of the Act. Finding that the Award does not include the cost of a well and standing lemon trees, the petitioner submitted a representation on 21.04.2016 vide Annexure- D, to pay compensation for the well and standing trees in Sy. No. 114/1, as per the estimate valuation dated 10.03.2014 and sought modification of the Award dated 28.02.2016, as at Annexure-G. Finding no response, this petition was filed for directing respondent No. 2 to modify the Award. Smt. Ratna N. Shivayogimath, learned Advocate contended that by not granting compensation in respect of the well and standing lemon trees found in the petitioner's land, there is violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution. She submitted that respondent No. 2 being a Public Officer should protect the interests of the petitioner, who is an agriculturist. She submitted that there being inaction in the matter of consideration of the representation submitted vide Annexure-D, respondent No. 2 be directed to consider the representation and modify the Award so as to include the value of the well and 40 lemon trees found in the acquired property.

(2.) Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned AGA, on the other hand contended that this petition is nothing but bypassing the statutory remedy under S. 18 of the Act. She submitted that there being alternate remedy statutorily provided and as factual adjudication is required, petitioner be not allowed to invoke the extra-ordinary writ remedy.

(3.) Considered the rival contentions and perused writ record. Respondent No. 2 has passed the Award on 28.02.2016. Representation was submitted on 21.04.2016 to pay the compensation in respect of a well and 40 lemon trees by modifying the Award. Point for consideration is, in the light of the provisions made in the Act and in the absence of provision conferring power of jurisdiction on respondent No. 2 to pass a second Award/supplementary Award, whether a writ in the nature of mandamus can be issued?