- (1.) B. S. Chauhan, J. The petitioner, holding Power of Attorney on behalf of Ram Ugrah, Ram Darash and Ram Sumer, who are the tenure-holders in respect of the land subjected to the acquisition proceedings, has questioned the validity and legality of the order dated 22-3-2007, which is founded on an order passed by the Commissioner, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur on 20-3-2007, whereby the Commissioner has approved the proposed Award in respect of 7. 109 hectares of land, situate in Village Hamidpur, Tappa-Khutahan, Pargana Haveli, Tehsil Sadar, District Gorakhpur.
(2.) WE have heard Shri I. N. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. The grounds for assailing the impugned order are that the Commissioner has acted in contravention of the provisions of Section 15-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the Act), read with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Manual, which has prejudiced the claim of the tenure-holders, and the order ignores the report dated 10-7-2006, which has resulted in a totally incorrect and arbitrary fixation of the rate of compensation payable to the tenure-holders, and further the Commissioner has failed to exercise the power vested in him in terms of the Government Order dated 2-9-1994 which has been brought on record through a supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has urged that the order impugned does not call for any interference as the Commissioner has exercised his powers under the Act to approve the proposed Award which cannot be questioned by the petitioner in these proceedings and the petitioner can raise his grievances with regard to the quantum of compensation as and when the Award is finally made by the Collector under Section 11 of the Act. In rejoinder learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that the State Government did not exercise its powers under Section 15-A and the application filed by the tenure-holders annexed as Annexure 3 to this petition dated 16-1-2006 should have been disposed of by the State Government, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief of issuance of an appropriate direction in this regard.
(3.) WE have examined the rival contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. The facts as unfolded in the petition indicate that the tenure-holders upon having come to know about the proposed Award, moved an application on 16-1-2006 (Annexure 3) before the Director, Land Acquisition Directorate, Board of Revenue, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. The petitioner represents three of such applicants whose names have been indicated in the Power of Attorney appended as Annexure 1 and whose names find place at SI. Nos. 22, 23 and 24 of the application dated 16-1- 2006. The said application appears to have been processed by the Director, Land Acquisition and a letter was addressed to the District Magistrate/collector, Gorakhpur on 13-4-2006 calling for comments on the same within 15 days. The Commissioner, who according to the Notification dated 2-9-1994 is the Approving Authority under Section 11 (1) of the Act, called upon the Special Land Acquisition Officer to proceed in accordance with law and to intimate him accordingly. The District Magistrate vide his letter dated 2-5-2006 sent his comments with a request that appropriate orders be passed under Section 15-a of the Act. In response thereto, the Director on 22-6-2006 intimated the Collector, Gorakhpur that the desired comments in detail had not been furnished, and as such, called for specific comments on the application moved by the tenure-holders. The Collector responded vide letter dated 10-7-2006 alongwith his detailed report (Annexure 8 ).;