Sri Kishan v. Special Land Acquisition Officer — 1993 DIGILAW 48 (ALL)

JUDGMENT : V.K. KHANNA, J. 1. Land of all the Petitioners in these connected writ petitions was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It has not been disputed that the award was given in the case of all the Petitioners on 3.1.1986. The applications for making a reference u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act admittedly, has been made after six months, from the date of the award. The aforesaid applications moved by the Petitioners have been rejected by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Avas) Coelenterate. Kanpur Nagar by the similar orders passed in all the cases on 20th March, 1987. The applications have been rejected on the grounds that they are not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and have not been filed within the prescribed period of limitation. 2. At the admission stage, the parties have exchanged counter and rejoinder affidavits and the present writ petitions are being disposed of finally in accordance with the Roles of the Court. 3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners has urged before us relying en a decision of the Supreme Court, A.V. Venkateswaran, Collector of Customs, Bombay vs. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani and Another, AIR 1961 SC 1506 , that the limitation should have been counted from the date of either communication of the award or when the award becomes known to the Petitioners. it has been urged that the Petitioners were not present before the Special Land Acquisition Officer and had no knowledge of the award and thus the limitation. should have been counted from the date when the Petitioner had come to know of the award, Proviso (a) and (b) to Sub-section (2) of section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act provides as follows: (2) The application shall state the pounds on which objection to the award is taken: Provided that every such application shall be made: (a) If the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made him award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award. (b) In other oases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice fro" the Collector u/s 12, Sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever parted shall first expire. 4. (b) In other oases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice fro" the Collector u/s 12, Sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever parted shall first expire. 4. From the aforesaid provisions it is, therefore, clear that in case the Petitioners were present in person at the time of making of the award, the applications for reference could be made within six weeks form the date of the award given by the Collector. In other cases, the limitation had to be counted from the date of the service of notice u/s 12(2) of the Act. In case the award was not given in presence of the Petitioners, the limitation will fee counted from the date of the knowledge of the award. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed in this case and the State hat come-out with the case that notice u/s 12(2) of the Act had been served on the Petitioners and they had also received the compensation. The Petitioners have filed rejoinder affidavits end they have denied the service of notice u/s 12(2) of the Act. 6. A bare perusal of the impugned order would show that while rejecting the applications for making reference u/s 18 of the Act, the Special Land Acquisition Officer has not considered the effect of proviso (a) and (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Act. In the order, it has also not been stated that as to how the applications were not la accordance with the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder. In oar opinion, the orders passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer 1B all these cases are, therefore, arbitrary and are liable to be quashed. In the order, it has also not been stated that as to how the applications were not la accordance with the provisions of the Act or the Rules framed thereunder. In oar opinion, the orders passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer 1B all these cases are, therefore, arbitrary and are liable to be quashed. The Special Land Acquisition Officer will consider the applications moved by the Petitioners again and will first record a finding as to whether the Petitioners had knowledge of the award at the time of its delivery by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in case he comes to the conclusion that the Petitioners had no knowledge of the award at the time of giving award, the Special Land Acquisition Officer will record a finding whether notices u/s 12(7) of the Act were in fact served on the Petitioners or not, in case the finding is recorded in favour of the Petitioners on these points the Special Land Acquisition Officer will further record a finding as to on what date the Petitioners got knowledge of the award. After recording findings on these questions in the manner observed above, the Special Land Acquisition Officer thereafter, will calculate the limitation as provided in Section 18(2) (a) and (b) of the Act. The Special Land Acquisition Officer will also record a specific finding as to in what manner the applications moved by the Petitioners were not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. 7. For the reasons stated above, all the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders of the Special Land Acquisition Officer dated 20th March, 1987 are quashed.