Prior approval under land acquisition law is administrative only and cannot be used to reappreciate compensation evidence.

Prior approval under the proviso to Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is limited to administrative confirmation of the Collector's proposed award and does not confer appellate jurisdiction. The Collector's inquiry under Section 11 remains quasi-judicial, requiring determination of compensation on the material before him after hearing interested persons. The Commissioner may examine whether the proposal is acceptable, but cannot reappreciate evidence, disagree with the Collector's findings, remand the matter as an appellate authority, or direct refixation of market value and compensation. The broader power to examine legality or propriety and issue directions lies separately with the appropriate Government under Section 15A.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner, while granting prior approval under the proviso to Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, could reappreciate the material on record, disagree with the Collector's determination of compensation, and direct refixation of market value and compensation.

Analysis: The inquiry under Section 11 is quasi-judicial and vests in the Collector, who must hear interested persons and determine compensation on the basis of the material before him. The proviso to Section 11(1) requires prior approval of the proposed award, but approval in that context means only confirming, ratifying, assenting to, sanctioning, or consenting to the proposal. It does not confer appellate jurisdiction. The Commissioner may examine whether the proposed award is acceptable, but cannot reverse the Collector's findings, remand the matter as an appellate authority, or issue binding directions on how the material should be appreciated. The broader power to examine legality or propriety and issue appropriate directions is separately conferred on the appropriate Government under Section 15A.

Conclusion: The Commissioner had no appellate power under the proviso to Section 11(1) and could not unilaterally reappreciate the evidence or direct refixation of compensation; that contention was accepted in favour of the appellants.

Final Conclusion: The decision declares the approval power under the proviso to Section 11(1) to be limited and administrative in character, distinct from the revisional or appellate power vested in the appropriate Government under Section 15A.

Ratio Decidendi: Prior approval under the proviso to Section 11(1) authorizes only administrative confirmation of the Collector's proposed award and does not include appellate or revisional power to substitute the Commissioner's view on compensation.

---