Telangana High Court
Nooti Bapu vs The District Collector Karimnagar ... on 24 December, 2024
Author: T. Vinod Kumar
Bench: T. Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
W.P.No.27236 of 2013
O R D E R:
None appears for the petitioners.
2. Heard learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 2, and perused the record.
3. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not referring the application submitted by the petitioner dt.04.10.2012 against the land acquisition award dt.28.06.1993 to the competent Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'), as bad, arbitrary, illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice.
4. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition submits that an Award has been passed on 28.06.1993, whereby various extents of lands including the lands of the petitioners were acquired for being provided to Singareni Collieries Limited; and that the respondents-authorities have also paid compensation as determined under the aforesaid Award.
5. Learned Government Pleader further submits that the petitioners have filed representation seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act, after lapse of 19 long years from the date of 2 passing of the Award, and as such the representation filed by the petitioners cannot be considered as having been filed within the time prescribed under Section 18 of the Act for the authority to make a reference to the competent Authority constituted under the Act.
6. Learned Government Pleader further submits that even assuming that the said application filed by the petitioners to be considered as an application filed under Section 28A of the Act, having been filed after passing of the Award in O.P.No.17/2004 by the Civil Court, even then the said application is beyond the period of three months as prescribed thereunder, and as such, the aforesaid application submitted by the petitioners cannot be considered for making a reference to the competent Civil Court.
7. I have taken note of the aforesaid submissions made.
8. By the present Writ Petition, though the petitioners being aggrieved by Award passed and the compensation amount determined, claim to have filed an application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act on 04.10.2012, it is to be noted that as per Section 18 of the Act, such an application is required to be filed within six (06) weeks, if the awardee had taken part in the Award proceedings, failing which, within two (02) months from the date of issuance of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act. 3
9. Admittedly, the petitioners did not file the application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act within the period of time prescribed under the Act.
10. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that aggrieved by the Award, dt.28.06.1993, passed by the Land Acquisition Authority, some of the awardees sought reference and the matter on being referred to the Competent Court was numbered as OP.No.17/2004, and an order was passed therein on 22.12.2006.
11. Though the petitioners did not file application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act, on passing of the award in the year 1993, however, would get an opportunity once-again under Section 28A of the Act to seek redetermination of the compensation amount on the basis of the Award passed by the Civil Court in the OP. However, such an application is required to be submitted within a period of three (03) months from the date of the Award.
12. Petitioners in the present case, however, did not choose to make an application under Section 28A of the Act within three (03) months from the date of the consent Award, dt.22.12.2006, and on the other hand filed the application under Section 18 of the Act, only after lapse 5 years 10 months from the date of the order of the Civil Court in O.P.No.17 of 2004.
4
13. Thus, the said application filed by the petitioners on 04.10.2012 cannot even be considered as an application filed under Section 28A of the Act, for this Court to issue direction to the respondents-authorities to make reference to the Authority for redetermination of the compensation amount under the Award, dt.28.06.1993.
14. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that no case is made out by the petitioners for grant of any relief in the present Writ Petition, and the Writ Petition is devoid of merit.
15. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
16. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these writ petitions shall stand closed.
_____________________ T. VINOD KUMAR, J 24th December, 2024.
gra 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.27236 of 2013 Dt.24.12.2024 gra