After Acquisition Officer Cut Land Award From ₹40.9 Lakh To ₹1.63 Lakh, Karnataka HC Orders Original Compensation Released

The petitioners, legal representatives of Aravind, claimed ownership and possession of land in Survey No. 129/4, Mahalbagayat Village, Vijayapur.

An extent of 550 sq. metres was acquired for the National Highways Authority of India under the National Highways Act, 1956.

The Competent Authority made an award on 22 September 2015, fixing compensation at Rs. 40,94,541; the petitioners received notice of the award on 30 January 2016.

After the petitioners sought release of compensation, the Competent Authority issued a revised award on 4 July 2019, reducing compensation to Rs. 1,62,837 on the ground that the land had been converted to non-agricultural use after the acquisition notification.

The petitioners challenged the revised award by writ petition.

Under the National Highways Act, the Competent Authority has no power to review or modify an award after it has been passed unless such power is conferred by statute; upon making the award, the authority becomes functus officio.

The Court relied on the Karnataka High Court Division Bench decision in The Managing Director, BMTC, Bangalore v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ramanagara and Others, MFA No. 1945/2016, decided 30 August 2024, which applied the principle that an award cannot be reviewed absent statutory authority and that the land-acquisition officer becomes functus officio after making the award.

Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act provides an arbitral remedy in relation to compensation, but the Court held that this alternative remedy did not bar relief against the impugned award, which was made without jurisdiction.

The Competent Authority had already made the 2015 award determining compensation. The 2019 revised award altered that determination, but the Court found no provision in the National Highways Act authorising the Authority to reopen or modify its award.

The Authority had therefore acted beyond its jurisdiction, regardless of its stated reason for treating the land as agricultural.

The Court also rejected the NHAI’s alternative-remedy objection, allowing the writ petition to proceed against an award that was without jurisdiction.

It directed the Competent Authority to release compensation to the petitioners in accordance with the original award dated 22 September 2015, within six weeks of receiving a copy of the order.

No order was made as to costs.