JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. A.R Malhotra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order under Memo No. WP (C) 100/2017-DC (K)/11 dated 27.10.2017, passed by the District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib, by which the application of the petitioners under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended was rejected on the ground that the petitioner possessed the land involved in the case pertaining to the Award No. 1/2012 (Part-C-Hortoki) dated 13.09.2012 that was acquired for the purpose of construction of Railway Line from Bairabi to Sairang by NF Railway considering the fact that the petitioners were allegedly occupying the said land on the basis of Garden Passes issued by the Village Council, since this Court have held that issuance of Garden Pass by the Village Council does not give any right to such pass holders to claim any form of compensation as they are not owners of the land . 3. It is seen from the annexures appended to their writ petition that earlier the petitioners had approached this Court in WP (C) No. 100/2017 against the Order dated 10.04.2017 (Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition) passed by the District Collector, Kolasib rejecting their application under Section 28A of the L.A Act holding that application submitted by the petitioner on 27.03.2017 (Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition) for re-determination of the said Award and payment of compensation is lapsed by time. The petitioners stated that earlier they application under Section 28A of the LA Act before the said District Collector- cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib on 20.03.2015 (Annexure-3 to the Writ Petition) and that the concerned Collector did not consider their said application under Section 28A of the LA Act while rejecting their such claim by said Order dated 10.04.2017 stating that their said application 27.03.2017 is only a reminder to their earlier application dated 20.03.2015. After hearing the parties, the Court vide Order dated 01.08.2017 passed in WP (C) No. 100/2017 set aside the said Order dated 10.04.2017 of the District Collector, Kolasib and remanded back the matter to the said District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib for consideration of the application of the petitioners made on 20.03.2015 under Section 28A of the LA Act, 1894, in accordance with law (Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition). 4. Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended reads as follows:- "28-A. Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court.-(1) Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under section 4, sub-section 91) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court. Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this sub-section, the day on which the award was pronounced ant the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. (2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub-section (1) conduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and make an award determining the amount of compensation payable to the applicants. (3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub-section (2) may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court and the provisions of sections 18 to 28 shall, so far as may be, apply to such reference as they apply to reference under section 18." 5. The District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner earlier on 10.04.2017 rejected the application of the writ petitioners under Section 28A of the LA Act, holding that they filed such application on 27.03.2017 and came to the finding that petitioners said application for re-determination of compensation under Section 28A of the LA Act have already lapsed and cannot not be considered and the petitioners by filing WP (C) No. 100/2017 brought to the notice of the Court, they earlier filed such application on 20.03.2015 and accordingly, the Court by its Judgment & Order dated 01.08.2017 passed in said WP (C) No. 100/2017 directed the District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner to consider the application made by the petitioners on 20.03.2015 under Section 28A of the L.A Act, 1894, in accordance with law. 6. As per the provision of Section 28A (1) , if the person interested, whose land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended, though aggrieved with the Award under Section 11 passed by the Collector regarding the amount of acquisition compensation, but did not file any application for Reference under Section 18 of the said Act, such person interested can get the benefit of higher compensation, if the Court (as defined under the LA Act) enhances such amount of acquisition compensation on an application for Reference under Section 18 of the said LA Act made by another aggrieved person interested against the Award of the Collector whose land was also acquired and covered by the same Notification under Section 4 of the LA Act, subject to filing of such application for re-determination of amount of compensation before the concerned Collector within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of such Award of the Reference Court, on the basis whereof the re-determination is sought, excluding the time that was required for obtaining the copy of the said Award of the Reference Court, to be submitted with such application for re-determination. 7. 7. Therefore, while re-determining the Compensation as per Section 28A of the LA Act, 1894 as amended, it is mandatory for the concerned Collector at first is required to ascertain as to whether such application under Section 28A of the LA Act was filed by the person interested within the period of 3 (three) months as per the Proviso to Sub-Section 1 of Section 28A of the LA Act, by verify the date of the Award of the Reference Court on the basis which the re-determination is sought by the person interested, the date of the application for copy of the said award of reference Court along with the date when the same was delivered and the date on which the person interested filed the application for re- determination of the amount of compensation before the said collector with the said copy of the Award of the Reference Court. On finding such application being submitted/filed within the said time limit as prescribed by sub-Section 1 of Section 28A of the LA act, the concerned Collector shall proceed further as per the provisions of sub-Sections 2 and 3 of Section 28A of the LA Act to re- determine the acquisition compensation in terms of the said Award of the Reference Court on the basis of which such re-determination is sought. 8. In that circumstances, this Court while disposing of the WP (C) No. 100/2017 vide its Order dated 01.08.2017, directed the District Collector-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib to consider the application dated 02.03.2015 of the petitioners filed under Section 28A of the LA Act, in accordance with law. It is only after such findings of the Collector was required to proceed further in re- determining the compensation for acquisition of land of the person interested following the provision of Sub Sections 2 & 3 of said Section 28A of the LA Act as prescribed in it. Moreover, the Collector cannot go beyond the Award of the Reference Court on the basis of which such re-determination is sought and the provision of sub-Sections 2 & 3 of said Section 28A of the LA Act, while making such re-determination. 9. Moreover, the Collector cannot go beyond the Award of the Reference Court on the basis of which such re-determination is sought and the provision of sub-Sections 2 & 3 of said Section 28A of the LA Act, while making such re-determination. 9. However, the impugned Order dated 27.10.2017 does not reflect that while considering the case of the petitioners herein, the District Collector-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib came to any such findings noted above and rejected the said application of the petitioner in a differrent ground, which was not an issue in the said Award of the Reference Court. 10. Accordingly, the Order under Memo No. WP (C) 100/2017-DC (K) /11 dated 27.10.2017 of the District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib, with regard to the petitioners herein is hereby set aside and quashed and the District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner shall now re-do the exercise in terms of the order dated 01.08.17, passed in WP (C) No. 100/2017 with regard to the case of the petitioners/applicants by following the procedure as laid down in Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended and the said Collector shall complete the said exercise within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of submission of certified copy of this order by the petitioners along with the copy of this writ petition including the annexure appended thereto. 11. While considering the case of the petitioners as directed above, the District Collector-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and also shall inform them about the outcome of their said application (s) under Section 28A of the L.A Act. 12. With the above observation and direction this writ petitions stands disposed. 13. Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate shall send back the record placed before the Court today forthwith to the District Collector-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Kolasib.