JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for all the respondents. 2. On 30.05.2018, when the matter was listed for motion, this Court passed the following order: "Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, the learned counsel for the petitioners who submits that the land of the two petitioners covered by Periodic Patta No. 103602/10/38 of 2004 and Periodic Patta No. 103602/10/120 of 2005 was acquired by the respondents concerned for construction of road from Sihhmui to Ramrikawn and by which compensation was paid only towards damages of crops. However, the learned Land Acquisition Judge in case of similar situated other person, upon considering the application filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide Judgment & Order dated 22.05.2017, awarded compensation towards the value of their land. The petitioners thereafter, filed an application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 claiming similar relieves on 21.08.2017. Mr. A.R. Malhotra submits that the petitioners filed their application under the aforesaid Section within the time prescribed and notwithstanding the fact that the petitioners have not filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, they would be entitled to similar benefits. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, instead of issuing notice at this stage, the learned Government Advocate Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte shall obtain instructions as regard to the status of the application filed by the petitioners before the District Collector on 21.08.2017. To enable the learned Government Advocate to obtain such instructions, let the case be listed again on 05.06.2018. A copy of this order be furnished to the learned Government Advocate for the needful." 3. Today, the learned Govt. Advocate, Mr. Samuel Vanlalhriata Chhangte upon being instructed has produced a copy of the communication dated 4. 06.2018, addressed to him by the respondent No. 1, informing him that as the Award No. 1/2013 for construction of road between Sihhmui to Ramrikawn and to Mizoram University was announced on 12.07.2013 but however, the petitioners submitted their application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (L.A Act) only on 21.08.2017, which was after lapse of about 4 (four) years. Therefore, their application cannot be entertained at this stage. 4. Therefore, their application cannot be entertained at this stage. 4. Upon considering the nature of the case, presented by the petitioners and with the consent of the learned counsels appearing for the rival parties, this Court proposes to dispose the writ petition at the motion stage itself. 5. At the outset, brief facts of the case may be noticed. The respondents for the purpose of construction of road from Sihhmui to Ramrikawn had initiated proceedings for acquisition of land measuring 2305467.26 sq.ft/160.10 bighas located within Aizawl District under the provisions of the L.A Act. For the purpose of acquisition Notification under Section 4 (1) of the L.A Act was issued by the Govt. of Mizoram, Revenue Department vide Memo No.K.12011/51/13-REV dt.20/3/2013. After verification and demarcation of the land, a declaration under Section 6 of the L.A Act was issued by the Govt. of Mizoram, Revenue Department, vide Notification Memo No.K.12011/51/13-REV dt.16/5/2013. The land belonging to the petitioners covered by P.Patta No. 103602/10/38 of 2004 and P.Patta No.103602/10/120 of 2005 fell within the proposed area for construction of road from Sihhmui to Ramrikawn. Thereafter, the process of land acquisition continued under the L.A Act and culminated into passing of Award No. 1 of 2013 on 12/7/2013 by the respondent No. 1. The instant petitioners were also included in the said Award No. 1 of 2013 as land owners, entitled to receive compensation and they were paid Rs. 1,34,950/- and Rs. 3,70,682/- respectively for damages to their crops. Later, the petitioners came to know that the other land owners i.e., P.Patta holders from Sakawrtuichhun Village, the acquisition of whose lands were covered the same notification under Section 4 of the L.A Act and Award No. 1 of 2013 had filed a reference application under Section 18 of the L.A Act for awarding market value of their lands. The reference petition was registered as L.A Case No. 8 of 2014 and was disposed by the learned Addl. District Judge-II, Aizawl vide Judgment & Order dated 22/5/17 by directing the respondent No. 1 to give market value of the land of the claimants therein at the rate of Rs. 38/- per sq.ft. along with 30% solatium on the market value as provided under Section 23 (2) of the L.A Act and interest at the rate 12% per annum on the market value as provided under Section 23 (1A) of the same Act. 38/- per sq.ft. along with 30% solatium on the market value as provided under Section 23 (2) of the L.A Act and interest at the rate 12% per annum on the market value as provided under Section 23 (1A) of the same Act. The reference court also directed for payment of interest under Section 28 of the L.A Act at the rate of 9% per annum with effect from the dated of possession upto one year and thereafter, at the rate of 15% per annum till payment, after adjusting payment made towards interest, if any. On learning about the said Judgment & Order dated 22.05.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge-II, the instant petitioners being covered by the same Notification under Section 4 of the L.A Act and being aggrieved by the Award No. 1 of 2013 made by the Respondent No. 1, approached the respondent No. 1 i.e., District Collector, Aizawl by filing an application under Section 28A of the L.A Act on 21.08.2017 which was within three months from the date of the Award of the Court, for redetermination of the amount of compensation payable to them, on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court. The said application was duly received by the respondent No.1 on 21/8/2017 but as the same was not considered, the petitioners are before this Court. 6. Coming to the claim of the petitioners under Section 28A of the L.A Act, 1894, it would be gainful to abstract the relevant provisions provided therein as below: "28A. Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. 6. Coming to the claim of the petitioners under Section 28A of the L.A Act, 1894, it would be gainful to abstract the relevant provisions provided therein as below: "28A. 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 (1) 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 and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded." 7. As can be noticed from the abstract made herein above, irrespective of the fact that the person aggrieved against the Award of the Collector has not made an application under Section 18 of the L.A Act before the Collector, he or she shall be entitled to the redetermination of the amount of compensation assessed on the basis of the Award made by the Court on the application made by persons similarly situated, subject to the application having been made before the Collector within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of Award of the Court. It may further be noticed that the Court of Additional District Judge-II, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl on the application made by similarly situated persons for enhancement of the Award through an application under Section 18 of the L.A Act reassessed the amount of compensation entitled to the claimants by enhancing the amount vide its Judgment & Order dated 22.05.2017 in L.A Case No. 8 of 2014 (Annexure-4). Therefore, the petitioners being similarly situated and notwithstanding the fact that they had not filed an application under Section 18 of the L.A Act would be entitled to similar benefits as granted by the learned Additional District Judge II, which admittedly is a Court as defined under Section 3 (d) of the L.A Act. 8. The instruction received by the learned Govt. Advocate that the application of the petitioners dated 21.08.2017 having made after lapse of 4 (four) years from the date of the Award i.e., 12.07.2013 is only misconceived inasmuch as computation of the period of three (3) months time to make an application under Section 28A of the L.A Act will commence from the day just after the pronouncement of the Award by the Court and not by the Collector. The petitioners having made their application on 21.08.2017 and the learned Addl. District Judge II having passed the Judgment & Order dated on 22.05.2017, the application was clearly made within the prescribed period of 90 (ninety) days as per Section 28A of the L.A Act. It may further be noticed that the proviso to the said Section also provides that the date on which the Award was pronounced as well as the time taken for obtaining requisite copy of the Award is to be excluded. Therefore, it is clear that the application was made within time. 9. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances vis-a-vis the relevant provision of the L.A Act and upon hearing the learned counsels for the parties, their cannot be any other conclusion other than holding that the petitioners are indeed entitled to similar benefits as was given to the other persons in terms of the Judgment & Order dated 22.05.2017, passed in L.A Case No. 8/2014. 10. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent No. 1 to entertain the application filed by the petitioners on 21. 08.2017 by making necessary assessment in terms of the Judgment & Order dated 22.05.2017, passed in L.A Case No. 8/2014. The said exercise shall be carried out as expeditiously as possible and not later than 60 (sixty) days from the dated of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. Upon completion of the assessment, the respondent No. 1 shall forward the same to the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 for arrangement of necessary fund. The said exercise shall be carried out as expeditiously as possible and not later than 60 (sixty) days from the dated of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. Upon completion of the assessment, the respondent No. 1 shall forward the same to the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 for arrangement of necessary fund. On receipt of such assessment, the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 shall deposit the said amount before the respondent No. 1 within 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of the same for disbursement to the petitioners. No cost.