Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 2847 (MAD)

K. Govindan v. District Collector, Salem District

2012-07-05

C.T.SELVAM

body2012
Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a mandamus directing the respondents to refer the matter in Award No.1/2002-2003, relating to the land in R.S.No.1086/8, Pudureddiyur, P.N.Patti, Mettur Taluk, Salem District, to a competent civil Court for deciding enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 2. The respondents acquired lands for the purpose of constructing Upper Ash Dykes in Mettur Thermal Power Project, Mettur. The petitioner informs that an extent of 1.20 acres of lands belonging to the petitioner comprised in R.S.No.1086/8, Pudureddiyur, P.N.Patti, Mettur Taluk, Salem district also stood acquired. The petitioner had participated in the award enquiry. The second respondent had fixed the total compensation at Rs.2,09,948/-. The petitioner had claimed a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-for the house constructed upon his property but the respondent has fixed the value thereof only at Rs.1,23,968/-. The award was passed on 05.11.2002. Reference made by the respondents under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred as "Act") regards the apportionment of compensation were adjudicated upon in L.A.O.P.No.18 of 2003 with the result that the learned Sub Court, Mettur, passed a judgment dated 24.12.2003 in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner received the compensation of Rs.2,09,948/- on 11.08.2003. The petitioner informs of having immediately sent an objection on 14.08.2003 requesting enhanced compensation and of raising further objections through counsel on 20.07.2004 and 19.12.2004, requesting the respondents to refer the matter under Section 18 of the Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the copy of the award dated 05.11.2002 was not served upon him and that he came to know thereof only on receipt of a notice dated 11.08.2003 pertaining to the reference made under Section 30 of the Act in L.A.O.P.No.18 of 2003. Urging the above, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction as prayed for. 4. Heard learned Special Government Pleader on the above submissions and perused the records. 5. In the instant case, the award is of the date 05.11.2002. A perusal of the records reveal and in fairness, it must be informed that learned counsel for the petitioner does not submit otherwise, that the petitioner had participated in the award enquiry and was present on the date of passing of the award. 6. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act reads as follows: "18. Reference to Court. A perusal of the records reveal and in fairness, it must be informed that learned counsel for the petitioner does not submit otherwise, that the petitioner had participated in the award enquiry and was present on the date of passing of the award. 6. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act reads as follows: "18. Reference to Court. - (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, be 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. (2) The application shall state the grounds 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 his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award; (b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Section 12, sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire." 7. Thus, when the award has been passed in the presence of the petitioner on 05.11.2002, he ought to have made a written application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act within six weeks of the award date. Not having done so, the petitioner cannot now be heard to complain. Though learned counsel for the petitioner has informed that the petitioner, being illiterate, was not aware of the quantum of compensation afforded under the award on the date thereof, this Court is unable to accept such contention towards granting any relief to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.