Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

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 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.
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 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 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)
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."