JUDGMENT - DESHPANDE M.S., J.: - This revision application by the applicant is directed against the order by which the Special Land Acquisition Officer asked him to pay the proper Court fee on his reference within eight days from the receipt of the letter. 2. The applicant's land was acquired by the State Government for Paldhag Project for construction of a dam, and in the land acquisition proceedings, the applicant was awarded Rs. 45,000.65 as compensation. As the applicant considered this amount to be inadequate, he applied to the Land Acquisition Officer under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for making the reference to the Court, claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,94,305.30 less than the amount already awarded. He contended that he had become landless as the whole of his property had been acquired and that he had no means of paying the requisite Court-fee. He affixed a Court-fee stamp of Re. 1/- on the reference. The Land Acquisition Officer held that the applicant could not claim to be a pauper and informed him that he was unable to send the reference to the Civil Court unless proper Court-fee was paid within eight days from the receipt of the order dated 3-6-1982. This order was received by the applicant on 5-6-1982. The applicant then filed this revision application immediately in this Court. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader stated that there was no provision in the Land Acquisition Act which enabled the Collector to entertain an application like the one which can be entertained by the Civil Court under Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Rule 1 of Order 33 says that subject to the following provisions, any suit may be instituted by an indigent person. The reference obviously is to a suit in a Civil Court. Section 53 of the Land Acquisition Act provides that save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall apply to all proceeding before the Court under this Act. The reference obviously is to a suit in a Civil Court. Section 53 of the Land Acquisition Act provides that save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, shall apply to all proceeding before the Court under this Act. Evidently, the application which the applicant made was addressed to the Land Acquisition Officer, i.e. the Collector, and not to the Court and so the question of applicability of the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure to the proceedings before the Land Acquisition Officer cannot arise, by virtue of section 53 of the Land Acquisition Act. 4. Under section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, any person interested who has not accepted the award or the amendment thereof may by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested. Sub-section (3) thereof says that any order made by the Collector on an application under this section shall be subject to revision by the High Court, as if the Collector were a Court subordinate to the High Court within the meaning of section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Even Shri Kulkarni, the learned Advocate for the applicant, did not pretend that sub-section (3) of section 18 would clothe the Collector with the character of Civil Court and the application before him for reference can be put on par with a suit. That is only an enabling provision for the purposes of enabling this Court to entertain a revision application under section 115, Civil Procedure Code. 5. The contention of Shri Kulkarni, however, was that since there is no provision anywhere for the determination of the question, whether a person making an application under section 18 to the Collector is an indigent person or not, or for enabling him to obtain the leave, the proper course for the Land Acquisition Officer would be to send the reference together with the application for leave to sue as an indigent person, to the Court. 6. 6. It is clear that there are no such enabling provisions either in the Land Acquisition Act or in the Code of Civil Procedure. The application under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act cannot change its character and it would remain an application for reference to the Collector. It would not be a suit in a Civil Court and, therefore, it is not permissible by resorting to an analogy to extend the application of Order 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the applications for reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Once this position is clear, the only course open to the Collector is to ask the applicant to pay the requisite Court-fee before making a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Under Article 15 in Schedule 1 to the Bombay Court-fees Act, 1959, applications for reference to the Collector under section 18 are chargeable with the Court-fee of one-half of ad valorem fee on the difference, it any , between the amount awarded by the Collector and the amount claimed by the applicant, subject to a minimum fee of fifteen rupees. Evidently, the Court-fee has to be paid before the Collector, and the learned Land Acquisition Officer was, therefore, right in refusing to make a reference to the Court under section 18, unless the application for reference was accompanied by the requisite Court-fee. 7. Shri Kulkarni, however, contends that since he had moved this Court within the period within which the Court-fee could have been paid, he should now be permitted to pay the requisite Court-fee on the application for reference. This request is not opposed and I think that it would be only proper to permit the applicant to pay the requisite Court-fee. He may do so within six weeks and upon that being done, the Land Acquisition Officer shall send the reference under section 18, if it is complete in all other respects, to the Court. There will be no order as to the costs of this revision application. Order accordingly. -----