Supreme Court ने Article 227 के तहत High Court की supervisory power को सीमित किया – Subordinate Court के findings का पुनर्मूल्यांकन नहीं

<p>The <span class="key-term" data-definition="The Supreme Court of India is the apex judicial body with the power of final appellate jurisdiction and constitutional interpretation (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> clarified that a <span class="key-term" data-definition="High Courts are the principal civil courts of each state, exercising original, appellate, and supervisory jurisdiction (GS2: Polity)">High Court</span> cannot act as an appellate court while exercising its <span class="key-term" data-definition="Supervisory jurisdiction is the authority of a higher court to oversee and correct jurisdictional excesses of lower courts without re‑trying the case (GS2: Polity)">supervisory jurisdiction</span> under <span class="key-term" data-definition="Article 227 of the Indian Constitution empowers High Courts to supervise lower courts and tribunals to ensure they act within their jurisdiction (GS2: Polity)">Article 227</span>. The judgment arose from a compensation dispute involving <strong>Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd (NICE)</strong> and landowners in Bengaluru.</p> <h3>Key Developments</h3> <ul> <li>The High Court reduced the compensation awarded by the <span class="key-term" data-definition="The executing court is the trial or lower court that originally decides a case and whose order is being executed (GS2: Polity)">executing court</span> from ₹1,000 per sq. ft. to ₹500 per sq. ft., invoking its supervisory powers.</li> <li>The <span class="key-term" data-definition="The Supreme Court of India is the apex judicial body with the power of final appellate jurisdiction and constitutional interpretation (GS2: Polity)">Supreme Court</span> set aside this reduction, restoring the original award.</li> <li>It reiterated that the High Court may intervene only when there is an <span class="key-term" data-definition="A jurisdictional error occurs when a court decides a matter beyond the scope of its legal authority (GS2: Polity)">unwarranted assumption of jurisdiction</span>, gross abuse of jurisdiction, or unjustifiable refusal to exercise jurisdiction.</li> <li>The Court emphasized that the High Court cannot re‑weigh evidence or substitute its own factual findings unless the lower court’s decision is perverse or beyond its jurisdiction.</li> </ul> <h3>Important Facts</h3> <p>• The dispute originated from a 2007 compromise where NICE agreed to provide alternate land or compensation for land acquired for a road project.<br> • The executing court initially fixed compensation at ₹1,000 per sq. ft.<br> • The High Court, using its <span class="key-term" data-definition="Writ jurisdiction under Article 227 allows High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for supervisory control over subordinate courts (GS2: Polity)">writ jurisdiction</span>, reduced it to ₹500 per sq. ft.<br> • The Supreme Court, in a bench of <strong>Justice Aravind Kumar</strong> and <strong>Justice N.V. Anjaria</strong>, restored the origin