- (1.) The petitioners had earlier filed Writ-C No.61334 of 2007 and Writ-C No.62337 of 2007 to assail the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as also the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act. The said petitions were dismissed in default in the absence of learned counsel for the petitioners on 13 November 2009. It is stated that applications for recalling the said orders have been filed which are pending.
(2.) This petition has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to decide the application filed by the petitioners under Section 48(1) of the Act.
(3.) Section 48(1) of the Act gives power to the State to withdraw from acquisition of a land of which possession has not been taken. The said section, therefore, does not confer any right upon a tenure holder to move an application under Section 48(1) of the Act and this is also what has been observed by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 41260 of 2013 (Brij Mohan and others Vs. State of U.P and others) decided on 7 March 2017. The relevant observations are as follows: "At this stage it would also be useful to examine the scope of the exercise of powers by the State Government under Section 48 of the Act to withdraw from the acquisition of land. Section 48 of the Act only gives liberty to the State Government to withdraw from the acquisition. It does not confer a right upon a person whose land has been acquired to either challenge the acquisition proceedings or to seek enhancement of compensation under section 48 of the Act. Acquisition proceedings can be challenged after issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act by filing a writ petition. What must be remembered is that in the instant case the challenge to the acquisition proceedings had failed both in the High Court and the Supreme Court. Another opportunity is certainly not required to be given to the land owners to challenge the acquisition proceedings under Section 48(1) of the Act nor does section 48 confer a right upon a land owner to contend that if adequate compensation is not given, the State must withdraw from the acquisition. A land owner can seek enhancement of compensation under section 18 of the 1894 Act or by filing an appeal before the High Court and then before the Supreme Court. It can also be availed under section 64 of the 2013 Act.";