Law: Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)

Section: 18

  Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----S. 18---Civil` Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Order of Land Acquisition Judge ---Revisional jurisdiction---Competency/maintainability---High Court would have revisional powers in respect of orders made by Land Acquisition Judge seized of the matter under S.18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----S. 18---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.115---Over payment made by Authority (on account of excessive showing of trees) on land in question---Land Acquisition Judge directing petitioners to furnish bond to satisfaction of Court--Validity---Order of Land Acquisition Judge to the extent of mark-up/interest was set aside with the direction for disposal of matter within specified period. Fida Muhammad Khan for Petitioners. Abdul Qadir Khan on behalf of Respondents. ORDER The petitioners have assailed an order dated 11-11-1996 of learned Additional District Judge, Haripur who is dealing with the subject-matter on reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter be referred as act). In this respect they have filed the instant revision petition. The brief facts lying adjudication before the Judge in reference are in respect of over payment made by the respondents to the petitioners due to an alleged foulplay between the concerned authorities resulting in loss of huge amount to the Government exchequer. The modus operandi, said to have been adopted by the concerned authorities, was, that the number of trees standing on the acquired land were wrongly shown to be more, in award. Feeling aggrieved the acquiring agency namely WAPDA through Provincial Government has filed an objection to the award. Pending   proceedings before the learned Additional District Judge, Haripur, a demand/recovery started for the withdrawal of over-paid amount from the petitioners. It was in this background of the facts that an application was moved under the 'Act' before the Court of Additional District Judge by the petitioner on which order dated 11-11-1996 was passed. Aggrieved of the order, the petitioners filed the instant revision inter alia objecting to the authority of the Court…