Gujarat High Court
Ishabhai Umarbhai vs State Of Gujarat And Anr. on 7 March, 1988
Equivalent citations: AIR1988GUJ223, AIR 1988 GUJARAT 223
JUDGMENT Gokulakrishnan, C.J.
1. Rule. Mr. Hawa and Mr. Karia waive service of the rule. With the consent of the parties, all these matters are taken up today.
2. In all the above petitions, petitioners have come forward with Special Civil Applications, inter alia, praying for a direction to the competent authority to make a reference under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In all these cases, the prayer for making references under S. 18 was rejected on the ground that the same is barred by limitation.
3. As regards the facts in these cases are concerned, there is no dispute that the petitioners were not present at the time the. award was made by the Land Acquisition Officer; that the notice under S. 12(2) was sent without the award annexed thereto; and that the petitioners were not award of the contents of the actual award.
4. In view of these admitted facts, we can just refer to S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act reads as follows : -
"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 the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom I it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation amongst 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 Collector's award;
(b) in other-cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under S. 12, sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire."
5. From the above provisions of law, it is clear that the limitation starts running as provided, in S. 18(2)(b) on the facts and circumstances of this case. A Bench of our High Court in the judgment in the ' case of Rajat Hirabhai Motibhai v. Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation reported in (1985) 1 Guj LR 275, has held as under:-
"There is an obligation on the part of the Collector not merely to intimate about the passing of the award but he has to communicate the essential contents of the award, if not a copy of the award. In view of the said obligation of the Collector, it follows that the time for reckoning the period for filing a reference application will commence with the service of the copy of the award, and if such an application is made within time, there after. it shall be disposed of in accordance with law."
6. In the present case, the application was made for the purpose of referring the matter under S. 18 within the stipulated period mentioned in S. 18(2)(b). Such stipulated period has to be reckoned from the date of communicating the contents of the award as provided in the above said decision of our High Court.
7. Taking this principle laid down in the decision, petitioners in each of these petitions have filed the applications for reference within the stipulated period after they received the contents of the award. In those circumstances. the competent authority is not right in rejecting the applications for reference on the facts and circumstances of the present case. Following the principles laid down in the above said decision, the competent authority is directed to refer the matter under S. 18 to the Court within six weeks from the receipt of the writ from this Court. The orders of the competent authority rejecting the applications under S. 18 as time-barred are set aside. Rule is made absolute in each of the matters. There will be no order as to costs.
8. Rule made absolute.