Gujarat High Court
Mer Harbham Kara Through His Heirs vs The Deputy Collector on 1 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6541 of 2026
==========================================================
MER HARBHAM KARA THROUGH HIS HEIRS & ORS.
Versus
THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NITIN M AMIN(126) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,10,11,1.1,12,13,13.1,14,2,2.1,3,3.1,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR. JAY TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 01/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1) By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs;
"(A) To issue a writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the respondent to forward the reference of the petitioner made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the civil court forthwith, as Annex-C. (B) To pass any other appropriate order/direction that may be deemed just and necessary in the interest of justice."
2) Fact, in brief, giving rise to the filing of the present writ application may be summarized as under;
2.1) The respondent initiated proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') vide LAQ Case No.03 of Page 1 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 2023 and acquired various parcels of land of village Padardi, Taluka: Ranavav, District: Porbandar for the public purpose of Karli Reservoir. After completing the procedure prescribed under the Act, the respondent declared a common award in respect to all acquired survey numbers under Section 11 of the Act on 28.02.2006 in the absence of the writ applicant-claimant.
2.2) Thereafter, an undated notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was issued by the respondent and sent by post to the land owners informing them about declaring the award under Section 11 of the Act by him. The said notice was duly served to the writ applicant and other land owners wherein they were informed to be present before the respondent on 11.07.2006.
2.3) The writ applicant and other land owners remained present before the respondent on 11.07.2006. As the notice did not accompany copy of the award declared by the respondent, the writ applicant asked for the copy of the award. Accordingly, the respondent on 10.08.2006, supplied copy of the award and the writ applicant received it on the same day.
2.4) As the amount awarded to the writ applicant and other land losers being meagre, the writ applicant being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award, along with other land owners sought references under Section 18 of the Act and the same were presented in the office of the respondent on 11.09.2006, i.e, within 42 days of the receipt of the award as per the law.
Page 2 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 2.5) Upon inquiry, it is found that the respondent has not forwarded the reference filed by the writ applicant and other land owners to the concerned civil court till even 2024. Thereafter, the writ applicant and other land owners, through their advocate, made an application dated 13.09.2024 to the respondent informing that reference filed against his award has not been forwarded to the civil court, and if any order in that respect is passed, to supply copy thereof.
2.6) Thereafter, as no reply was received, the writ applicant made an inquiry through his advocate with the Registry of the concerned civil court regarding registration of his reference, however, to the utter shock and surprise of the writ applicant, he learnt that no reference of any of the land losers is forwarded to the civil court by the respondent even after the application dated 13.09.2024.
2.7) Being aggrieved, the writ applicant is here before this Court with the present writ application.
3) Learned advocate Mr. Nitin Amin appearing for the writ applicant submits that the issue involved in the present application lies in a very narrow compass. He submits that the land of the writ applicant was acquired by the State Government along with other parcels of land of other land owners for the public purpose of Karli Reservoir. Then, arter completing due procedure, a common award was declared by the acquiring body Page 3 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined under Section 11 of the Act in the absence of the writ applicant. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that the writ applicant as well as the other land owners were informed about passing of the award vide an undated notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Act, which was duly served to the writ applicant, and accordingly, the writ applicant also remained present before the respondent-authority on 11.07.2006. He submits that as the copy of the award was not attached with the notice, the writ applicant along with other owners applied for the certified copy of the award, which was accordingly provided to them by the respondent on 10.08.2006. Learned advocate Mr. Amin also submits that as the writ applicant and the other land owners were dissatisfied with the awarded amount, they sought reference under Section 18 of the Act on 11.09.2006, which was within the prescribed time limit of 42 days. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that despite reference having been filed within the prescribed time limit, the same has not been forwarded by the respondent-authority till even 2024. He submits that the writ applicant, upon coming to know about the same, made an application to the respondent on 13.09.2024, seeking information about the status of the reference filed by him. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that as no reply was received, the writ applicant then made an inquiry with the civil court, upon which, he came to know that no such reference has been received. He submits that such an action on the part of the respondent-authority is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law as the reference filed by the writ applicant and Page 4 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined other land losers were within the statutory period prescribed under the Act, and as such, it can be said that all conditions under Section 18 of the Act are fulfilled. Thus, there is no reason for not forwarding the reference of the writ applicant to the civil court for adjudication.
4) Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that till date, the writ applicant has not received any communication intimating him about the reason why his reference is not forwarded to the concerned reference court. He also submits that the writ applicant has lost their only source of livelihood in 2003 his land was compulsorily acquired. He further submits that all the land owners are without further compensation since last 20 years and thereby fundamental right guaranteed under Article 14 and statutory rights under Article 300A of the Constitution as well as under the Act are violated. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that the respondent has not even bothered to reply to the application of the writ applicant. He submits that by not forwarding reference to the civil court for almost 19 years, there is huge burden of interest to the public exchequer as the possession of the acquired lands was taken more than decades ago. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that it is well settled that whether the reference as sought for by the aggrieved losers is within the stipulated time limit or not, is the subject matter of consideration by the competent reference/civil court during the course of reference proceedings. Once the reference is sought, the acquiring body is bound to forward the Page 5 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined reference to the concerned reference/civil court, leaving the issue of limitation to be decided by the rereference court. Learned advocate Mr. Amin further submits that it is also well settled that if the person interested (or his representative) was not present when the award is made, and if he does not receive the notice under Section 12(2) from the Collector, he has to make the application within six months of the date on which he actually or constructively came to know about the contents of the award. To buttress his aforesaid submissions, learned advocate Mr. Amin has relied upon the following decisions
i) In the case of Premji Nathu vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in 2012 SCC Online SC 330;
ii) In the case of Bhagwan Das & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported in 2010 SCC Online SC 329;
5) In such circumstances, referred to above, learned advocate Mr. Amin prays that there being merit in this application, the same be allowed, and the relief, as prayed for, be granted.
6) The present application has been vehemenly opposed by learned AGP Ms. Surbhi Bhatt appearing for the respondent. She submits that apparently on the face of the record, there is a delay in preferring the reference, and as such, the authority concerned has not forwarded the reference to the concerned reference court. Learned AGP Ms. Bhatt also submits that the award was Page 6 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined passed by the Deputy Collector on 28.02.2006, whereas the application under Section 18 of the Act, seeking reference, was preferred on 11.09.2006, and as such, it is apparent on the face of the record that the said application was time barred being preferred after lapse of period of limitation. She has drawn the attention of this Court to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, more particularly, Section 18 thereof and submits that as per clauses (a)) of sub-section (2) of Section 18, 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 Collectors award, and as per clause (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 Collectors award, whichever period shall first expire. Admittedly, in the present case, the application was preferred by the writ applicant after the prescribed time limit, and therefore, the concerned authority has rightly not forwarded the same to the concerned reference/civil court. In support of her submissions, learned AGP Ms. Bhatt has relied upon the following decisions;
"I) In the case of Avinash Chandra Sondhi & Anr. vs. State of Chhatisgarh & Anr., reported in 2011 LawSuit (Chh) 359;
ii) In the case of Sicom Limited through its Regional Manager, Uddyog Bhavan, Civil Lines, Nagpur vs. State of Maharashtra, Thr.
Collector, Wardha, reported in 2017 LawSuit (Bom) 2242;
Page 7 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined
7) In such circumstances, referred to above, learned AGP Ms. Bhatt prays that there being no merit in this application, the same be rejected.
8) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.
9) It is an admitted position of fact that the land of the writ applicant was acquired by the Acquiring Authority in the year 2003 for public purpose of Karli Resorviour. Thereafter, an award was passed by the Deputy Collector on 28.02.2006, admittedly in the absence of the writ applicant. It appears from the record that, therefore, the writ applicant was informed about passing of such award by issuing notice, intimating him to remain present before the Deputy Collector on 11.07.2006. It also appears from the record that the copy of the award was not attached by the Deputy Collector along with the notice, and therefore, the writ applicant was not aware about the contents of the award. Therefore, the writ applicant applied for the certified copy of the award, which was received by him on 10.08.2006, and it is only when the writ applicant received the copy of the award, he came to know about the contents of the award passed by the Deputy Collector. As the writ applicant was dissatisfied with the amount awarded by the Deputy Collector, he immediately sought reference vide application dated 11.09.2006.
10) If we see the aforesaid chronology of events, the writ Page 8 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined applicant has come to know about the actual contents of the award only on 10.08.2006, i.e, after receiving the physical copy of the award. Moreover, if the record is perused, more particularly, the notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Act, the same does not reflect any date, and as such, in the absence of any date being mentioned on the notice, it is quite difficult to determine the period of limitation as embodied in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Act. So far as the second situation as provided in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 18 is concerned, the reference has to be within six months from the date of passing of the award by the Collector.
11) Section 12 and 18 of the Act, which have bearing in the determination of the issue involved in the present matter, read as under;
"12. Award of Collector when to be final. - (1) Such award shall be filed in the Collector's office and shall, except as hereinafter provided, be final and conclusive evidence, as between the Collector and the persons interested, whether they have respectively appeared before the Collector or not, of the true area and value of the land, and the appointment of the compensation among the persons interested.
(2) The Collector shall give immediate notice of his award to such of the persons interested as are not present personally or by their representatives when the award is made "18. Reference to Court:-
(1)Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of Page 9 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 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 Collectors 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 Collectors award, whichever period shall first expire."
12) An analysis of the above quoted provisions shows that by virue of Section 12(1), an award made by the Collector is treated as final and conclusive evidence of the true area and value of the land and appointment of the compensation among the persons interested. Section 12(2) provides that the Collector is required to give notice of his award to the interested persons who are not present either personally or through their representatives at the time of making of award.
13) Section 18(1) provides for making of reference by the Collector to the court for the determination of the amount of compensation etc. Section 18(2)(a) provides that an application for reference shall be made within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award, if at the time of making of award the person Page 10 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined seeking reference was present or was represented before the Collector, whereas clause (b) provides that if the person is not present or is not represented before the Collector, then the application for reference has to be made within six weeks of the receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire.
14) From the bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions, it appears that Section 12(2) of the Act mandates that the Collector must give immediate notice of the award to those interested persons (the "losers" of the land) who were not present when the award was officially made either in person or through their representative. This is to ensure that the losers are formally informed about the compensation details, which enables them to decide whether they should seek reference or not. The primary objective is to ensure that the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness are met with by communicating the award's contents to the affected party, and in the absence thereof, such a notice would become ineffective. Thus, a notice cannot be considered to be effective until it conveys all pertinent details of the award, including a copy of the award itself, which allows the landowners (losers) to understand the basis and quantum of compensation. Moreover, the date of receiving the notice under Section 12(2) is crucial because it often triggers the limitation period within which a landowner can apply to the Court for a reference to enhance the compensation amount under Section Page 11 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 18 of the Act. In the present matter, admittedly, the notice issued by the Collector was undated. Thus, without proper and effective notice (actual or constructive knowledge of the award's contents), the limitation period for challenging the compensation award does not begin.
15) The learned advocate for the writ applicant Mr. Amin relies upon the decision in the case of Premji Nathu (supra), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under;
"14. The reason for providing six months from the date of the award for making an application seeking reference, where the applicant did not receive a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, while providing only six weeks from the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act for making an application for reference where the applicant has received a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act is obvious. When a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act is received, the landowner or person interested is made aware of all relevant particulars of the award which enables him to decide whether he should seek reference or not. On the other hand, if he only comes to know that an award has been made, he would require further time to make enquiries or secure copies so that he can ascertain the relevant particulars of the award.
15. What needs to be emphasised is that along with the notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Act, the land owner who is not present or is not represented before the Collector at the time of making of award should be supplied with a copy thereof so that he may effectively exercise his right under Section 18(1) to seek reference to the Court.
16. In Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. Land Acquisition Officer, AIR 1961 SC 1500, this Court was called upon to decide Page 12 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined whether the expression 'date of award' is to be interpreted with reference to the time when the award is signed by the Collector or from the date the affected party comes to know about the same and held as under:
"5. ... Therefore, if the award made by the Collector is in law no more than an offer made on behalf of the Government to the owner of the property then the making of the award as properly understood must involve the communication of the offer to the party concerned. That is the normal requirement under the contract law and its applicability to cases of award made under the Act cannot be reasonably excluded. Thus considered the date of the award cannot be determined solely by reference to the time when the award is signed by the Collector or delivered by him in his office; it must involve the consideration of the question as to when it was known to the party concerned either actually or constructively. If that be the true position then the literal and mechanical construction of the words 'the date of the award' occurring in the relevant section would not be appropriate.
6. There is yet another point which leads to the same conclusion. If the award is treated as an administrative decision taken by the Collector in the matter of the valuation of the property sought to be acquired it is clear that the said decision ultimately affects the rights of the owner of the property and in that sense, like all decisions which affect persons, it is essentially fair and just that the said decision should be communicated to the said party. The knowledge of the party affected by such a decision, either actual or constructive, is an essential element which must be satisfied before the decision can be brought into force. Thus considered the making of the award cannot consist merely in the physical act of writing the award or signing it or even filing it in the Office of the Collector; it must involve the communication of the said award to the party concerned either actually or Page 13 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined constructively . If the award is pronounced in the presence of the party whose rights are affected by it it can be said to be made when pronounced. If the date for the pronouncement of the award is communicated to the party and it is accordingly pronounced on the date previously announced the award is said to be communicated to the said party even if the said party is not actually present on the date of its pronouncement. Similarly if without notice of the date of its pronouncement an award is pronounced and a party is not present the award can be said to be made when it is communicated to the party later. The knowledge of the party affected by the award, either actual or constructive, being an essential requirement of fair play and natural justice the expression 'the date of the award' used in the proviso must mean the date when the award is either communicated to the party or is known by him either actually or constructively. In our opinion, therefore, it would be unreasonable to construe the words 'from the date of the Collector's award' used in the proviso to Section 18 in a literal or mechanical way." (emphasis supplied)
17. In State of Punjab v. Qaisar Jehan Begum, AIR 1963 SC 1604, the principle laid down in Harish Chandra's case was reiterated and it was held:
"5. ... It seems clear to us that the ratio of the decision in Harish Chandra case is that the party affected by the award must know it, actually or constructively, and the period of six months will run from the date of that knowledge. Now, knowledge of the award does not mean a mere knowledge of the fact that an award has been made. The knowledge must relate to the essential contents of the award. These contents may be known either actually or constructively. If the award is communicated to a party under Section 12(2) of the Act, the party must be obviously fixed with knowledge of the contents of the award whether he reads it or not. Similarly when a Page 14 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined party is present in court either personally or through his representative when the award is made by the Collector, it must be presumed that he knows the contents of the award. Having regard to the scheme of the Act we think that knowledge of the award must mean knowledge of the essential contents of the award." (emphasis supplied)
18. In Bhagwan Das v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 3 SCC 545, this Court interpreted Section 18 and laid down the following propositions:
"(i) If the award is made in the presence of the person interested (or his authorised representative), he has to make the application within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award itself.
(ii) If the award is not made in the presence of the person interested (or his authorised representative), he has to make the application seeking reference within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Section 12(2).
(iii) If the person interested (or his representative) was not present when the award is made, and if he does not receive the notice under Section 12(2) from the Collector, he has to make the application within six months of the date on which he actually or constructively came to know about the contents of the award.
(iv) If a person interested receives a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, after the expiry of six weeks from the date of receipt of such notice, he cannot claim the benefit of the provision for six months for making the application on the ground that the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was the date of knowledge of the contents of the award."
19. The Court then held:
Page 15 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined "30. When a person interested makes an application for reference seeking the benefit of six months' period from the date of knowledge, the initial onus is on him to prove that he (or his representative) was not present when the award was made, that he did not receive any notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, and that he did not have the knowledge of the contents of the award during a period of six months prior to the filing the application for reference. This onus is discharged by asserting these facts on oath. He is not expected to prove the negative. Once the initial onus is discharged by the claimant/person interested, it is for the Land Acquisition Collector to establish that the person interested was present either in person or through his representative when the award was made, or that he had received a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, or that he had knowledge of the contents of the award.
31. Actual or constructive knowledge of the contents of the award can be established by the Collector by proving that the person interested had received or drawn the compensation amount for the acquired land, or had attested the mahazar/panchnama/proceedings delivering possession of the acquired land in pursuance of the acquisition, or had filed a case challenging the award or had acknowledged the making of the award in any document or in statement on oath or evidence. The person interested, not being in possession of the acquired land and the name of the State or its transferee being entered in the revenue municipal records coupled with delay, can also lead to an inference of constructive knowledge. In the absence of any such evidence by the Collector, the claim of the person interested that he did not have knowledge earlier will be accepted, unless there are compelling circumstances not to do so."
20. In the light of the above, it is to be seen whether the conclusion recorded by the Reference Court, which has been Page 16 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined approved by the High Court that the application filed by the appellant was barred by time is legally sustainable.
21. A careful reading of the averments contained in paragraph 2 of the application filed by the appellant under Section 18(1) shows that the notice issued by the Collector under Section 12(2) was served upon him on 22.2.1985. Thereafter, his advocate obtained certified copy of the award and filed application dated 8.4.1985 for making a reference to the Court. This implies that copy of the award had not been sent to the appellant along with the notice and without that he could not have effectively made an application for seeking reference.
22. On behalf of the State Government, no evidence was produced before the Reference Court to show that copy of the award was sent to the appellant along with the notice. Unfortunately, while deciding issue No.3, this aspect has been totally ignored by the Reference Court which mechanically concluded that the application filed on 8.4.1985 was beyond the time specified in Section 18(2)(b). The learned Single Judge of the High Court also committed serious error by approving the view taken by the Reference Court, albeit without considering the fact that the notice issued by the Collector under Section 12(2) was not accompanied by a copy of the award which was essential for effective exercise of right vested in the appellant to seek reference under Section 18(1). "
16) The learned AGP appearing on behalf of the Government has not disputed the aforesaid proposition of law. Accordingly, I am of the view that the aforequoted decision covers the issue on hand and apply on all fours to the facts of the present case, as the notice was not accompanied with the actual award. In the case on hand, there could not have been a valid notice of the Page 17 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6541/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined award, by an undated notice under subsection (2) of Section 12 of the Act, until the applicant received a certified copy of the award, which he received on 10.08.2006, and then being dissatisfied with the award, sought for reference vide application dated 11.09.2006, i.e. well within 42 days. Therefore, the reference for enhancement was, accordingly, not barred by limitation.
17) For the foregoing reasons, the present writ application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The respondent-Deputy Collector is hereby directed to make a reference to the civil court under Section 18 of the Act, without any delay, not later than two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
18) The present writ application is disposed of in the aforestated terms.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) GARVITA Page 18 of 18 Uploaded by GARVITA KACHHWAHA(HC02358) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:42:45 IST 2026