M. Cnandran and Another vs Spl. Tahsildar and Another

Jagannadha Rao, C.J., J.—This is an appeal filed by the writ petitioner. The point arising in this appeal is quite simple. The petitioner approached the Collector u/s 28A of the Land Acquisition Act seeking redetermination of the amount of compensation on the basis of an award passed by ''the court u/s 18 in regard to other lands covered by the same notification u/s 4(1). The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 13-7-1993 in regard to the enhanced compensation payable u/s 28A in the case of the appellant. However, he did not grant interest specified in Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, namely 9% for a period of one year from the date of taking possession and at 15% beyond that date. As the interest was not granted by the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of the enhanced compensation u/s 28A, the writ petitioner filed the present writ petition, seeking a direction to the Collector for payment of the above said interest at 9% for a period of one year from the date of taking possession, and at 15% beyond that date. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the appropriate authority u/s 28A (3). Thereafter the present appeal is filed. In this appeal, we find that while Section 28 applies to compensation redetermined u/s 28A, the interest mentioned in Section 28, namely, interest at 9% for a period of one year from the date of taking possession, and at 15% thereafter, is payable only upon the direction from the Court which takes up the case u/s IS of the Act. This is clear from the fact that u/s 28 the Court gives direction to the Collector to pay interest at the above said rates. Inasmuch as it is for the court dealing with the case u/s 18 to give the above said direction to the Collector for payment of interest, it will be necessary for the appellant to avail of his remedies u/s 18 of the Act in a civil court seeking a reference in respect of interest disallowed to him. Inasmuch as the grant of interest is not at the discretion of the Collector and it is only upon the direction of the court, this Writ Petition seeking a direction to the Collector cannot succeed.

In the result, while it would be open to the appellant to seek his remedies u/s 18 of the Act, we hold that there are no merits in this appeal, and the same is accordingly dismissed.