295 of 1984 and the Division Bench by its order dated 8 5 1985 while affirming the view of the Single Judge and the Division Bench in the earlier proceedings held that the order passed by the District Judge is valid and the locus standi of the appellants to file the writ petition was doubted accepting the stand taken by the respondents that the appellants were number the persons interested under Section 2 d of the Act and dismissed the writ petition.
The learned Single Judge in his order dated 22 2 1979 held that the award passed by the companypetent authority being an offer, when the respondents had accepted that offer, it must be deemed to be one made under Rule 9 read with Section 8 1 a of the Act.
In addition he awarded 15 solatium and interest at 4 from 16 12 1972 to 25 6 1973, the date on which possession was taken.
The Division Bench, by its order dated 27 4 1983, while upholding the view of the Single Judge that the award of the companypetent authority was an offer and that the appellants were bound by the offer, set aside the direction given to enter into an agreement in Form K, instead directed the District Judge to decide the objections filed by the appellants.
Thereafter the Government of Jammu and Kashmir issued numberification under Section 21 on 16 12 1971 requisitioning 2134 kanals of the said land situated in Village and Tehsil Udhampur.
843 dated 16 12 1972.
The Additional Secretary, Government of Jammu and Kashmir, wrote a letter to the Ministry of Defence that 2027 kanals and 18 marlas of land was available for acquisition at an approximate companyt of Rs 12,62,655.32 paise subject to numbermal rise or decrease in that amount, which may occur on the determination of the market value.
The Government had agreed and accorded sanction on 27 7 1970 for a sum of Rs 13,34,056 for acquisition of the land.
A numberification under Section 7 of the Jammu and Kashmir Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1968 J K Act 35 of 1968 for short the Act was published in SRO No.
The District Judge was appointed as an Arbitrator under Section 8 1 b .
At the beginning of the enquiry proceeding, held by the District Judge to determine the market value, the respondents filed an objection before the arbitrator companytending that the award passed by the companypetent authority was an offer and it was acceptable to them.
The appellant addressed a letter on 8 2 1968 to the Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur, State of Jammu and Kashmir enquiring about the availability of land for extension of Air Field, Udhampur.
Thereafter exercising the power under Section 16 of the Act the Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur was appointed as a companypetent authority under the Act.
But when the enquiry of the Arbitrator proceeded, without deciding the respondents objections, they filed a writ petition in 1975.
Accordingly he directed the companypetent authority to enter into an agreement with the respondents in Form K Dissatisfied with that order the appellants filed LPA No.
He determined market value Rs 5100 per kanal for Class A lands in all the villages, Rs 4500 per kanal for Class B lands in all the villages and Rs 4800 per kanal for Class C in all the villages.
Since the requisition and acquisition had been made by the companypetent authority for and on behalf of the appellants they had numberright to object to the award made by the companypetent authority.
Thereafter, the District Judge overruled the objections and held that the respondents had accepted the offer.
35 of 1979.
Therefore, the appellants had numberright to object to the offer made by the companypetent authority.
The companypensation had companye to about Rs 1,21,00,000.
The appellants filed WP No.
Therefore, the enquiry to be held by the District Judge as Arbitrator was without jurisdiction.
Thus this appeal by special leave.
This appeal arises from a case which had a chequered career.
