Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 896 (HP)

Liaq Ram v. State of H. P.

2017-08-02

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2017
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. The moot issue involved in these cases is as to whether after the receipt of reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Collector can deny forwarding the said reference petition to the Reference Court or in all eventualities after the receipt of reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the same has to be forwarded by the Land Acquisition Collector to the Reference Court. 2. According to Mr. G.D. Verma, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners, once the Land Acquisition Collector receives a reference after the Collector has made award, the Collector is bound to forward the same to learned Reference Court and in no eventuality the Collector can take a decision not to forward the same to learned Reference Court. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Vikram Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, submits that no fault can be found with the act of the Collector of not forwarding reference petitions to learned Reference Court as the award qua which the reference petitions were preferred by the land owners, was declared null and void by this Hon’ble Court vide judgment dated 26.04.2011 passed in CWP No. 2385 of 2010. 4. Learned Deputy Advocate General further submitted that thereafter Land Acquisition Collector also passed subsequent Award No. 13/2011 dated 28.06.2011 and the said award was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector after issuing notices to all the interested holders and after recording their statements. 5. It is settled law that on receipt of an application for reference it is mandatory for the Collector to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in the manner prescribed under Section 19 thereof. It is further settled law that it is not for the Collector to decide and reject reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act but he has to refer the same leaving the question open to be decided by learned Reference Court to which reference is made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act as to what relief the applicant is entitled to. Reference Court has wide powers to throw out a reference petition under Section 18 if it comes to the conclusion that the award was accepted without any protest or that the award was a consent award or otherwise. 6. Reference Court has wide powers to throw out a reference petition under Section 18 if it comes to the conclusion that the award was accepted without any protest or that the award was a consent award or otherwise. 6. Therefore, in the present cases, in my considered view, the Land Acquisition Collector erred in not forwarding the applications so received under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to learned Reference Court because the effect of the award having been declared null and void by this Court obviously could have been taken care of by learned Reference Court while answering the reference petitions. 7. Accordingly, all these petitions are disposed of with the direction that the Collector shall forthwith forward all the reference petitions to learned Reference Court and thereafter, learned Reference Court shall answer the same in accordance with law. It goes without saying that learned Reference Court shall be at liberty to answer reference petitions by taking into consideration the factum of the award against which reference petitions were filed having been declared null and void by this Court in CWP No. 2385 of 2010 decided on 26.04.2011 and any other fact having bearing on the same being placed before learned Reference Court by the parties concerned. 8. All the petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of.