Judgment :- 1. The facts leading to the Writ are the petitioner is the owner of the land mentioned in the petition. There is no dispute about it. The respondent in order to acquire the same for the formation of outer ring road, passed an award No.4/96. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondent has not issued any notice before the initiation of enquiry and the Land Acquisition Officer is supposed to issue notice thereafter, Notification under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, thereafter conduct an enquiry. It is stated that no opportunity was given to him to represent his matter. 3. The learned Special Government Pleader was unable to place any document to show that notice was served on the petitioner. Though in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is stated that the notice was issued and received by the petitioner, no such acknowledgment is produced. 4. The other contention of the petitioner is that they have not received the copy of the award till 4.10.2002 and he made a representation to the respondent through his letter dated 4.10.2002 requesting them to furnish a copy of the award in order to know the contents of the award and the manner in which the award is passed and in response to the same, the respondent delivered a copy of the award as requested in the letter dated 4.10.2002, in R.O.C. No. A1/1473/93. Therefore, it is clear that the award was not delivered to the petitioner till it was demanded by him. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader vehemently contented that the award was delivered to the petitioner within the time, and after a lapse of six years, the Writ Petition is filed. Therefore, the delay is not excusable. 6. I do not find force in the arguments of the learned Special Government Pleader for the reason that the respondent did not place any material to show that the award was served on the petitioner before 4.10.2002. Even the petitioner has also made a representation dated 12.11.2002 wherein, the petitioner is asking for a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. I do not understand the objection of the Government, for making a reference to the Court as provided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 7. Even the petitioner has also made a representation dated 12.11.2002 wherein, the petitioner is asking for a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. I do not understand the objection of the Government, for making a reference to the Court as provided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 7. For the foregoing reasons, I am of the opinion that the respondent should be directed to refer the matter to Sub-Court, Tirunelveli under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for reference. 8. With the above direction, this Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected W.P.M.P. is closed.