The order dated January 23, 1970 was upheld by this Court by dismissing the special leave petition.
Notification under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, the Act acquiring land for companystruction of the school for public purpose, was published on April 16, 1969.
Award under Section 11 was made on September 24, 1974.
On that basis, report was submitted to the Government and had stopped further action.
The Division Bench in L.P.A. No.1 of 1994 by its decision dated January 1, 1994 dismissed the same.
The acquisition proceedings having been once dropped by the Land Acquisition Officer by his proceedings dated July 13, 1973, he was devoid of power to reopen the same at the behest of the Gram Panchayat.
It would appear that after the High Court had upheld the validity of the numberification under Section 4 1 and the declaration under Section 6, an application was filed in the High Court for claiming value of the property in which the High Court determined market value at Rs.7,000/ per acre and also other values of the trees and buildings etc.
The Civil Court on a preliminary issue held that the suit was number maintainable.
Validity of the acquisition and of the award was challenged by filing a civil suit on January 3, 1975 for a declaration that the land companyld number be acquired.
The Government did number accede to the request.
The companytention raised by the learned companynsel for the petitioner is that the acquisition proceedings having been dropped by the Land Acquisition Officer, he had numberjurisdiction or power to reopen the same and to make the award under Section 11 of the Act.
No numberification under sub section 1 of Section 48 of the Act withdrawing acquisition of land, possession of which had number been taken, was published in the Gazette.
and the application was dismissed.
The learned single Judge by his judgment and order dated November 23, 1993 upheld the decision of the Civil Court.
The award is, therefore, clearly illegal for want of jurisdiction.
Validity thereof was challenged in C.M.P. No.60 of 1969.
Admittedly, the Government thereby had neither withdrawn from the acquisition number published the same in the Gazette.
The High Court by its order dated January 23, 1970 dismissed the writ petition.
While the enquiry was in progress, it would appear that the Gram Panchayat had stated before the Land Acquisition Officer that it had numberfunds so as to proceed with the award and requested him to drop the proceedings.
Thus this special leave petition.
