Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, nine individuals whose lands were acquired for the construction of the Urdhav Pravara right canal, challenged the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer rejecting their references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as time-barred. The acquisition award was passed on 13.11.2000, and notices under Section 12(2) were issued on 13.10.2003. The Talathi report indicated that these notices were served on the petitioners on 27.10.2003. The petitioners received the copy of the award on 9.12.2003, and on the same day, petitioners 1 to 8 filed their references under Section 18. Petitioner 9 filed the reference on 6.2.2004. The Special Land Acquisition Officer rejected all references on 9.2.2004, holding that they were not within the period of limitation. The petitioners argued that the limitation period should be computed from the date of receipt of the award copy (9.12.2003) or the date of service of notice (27.10.2003), and that their references were within time. The court examined the documents, including the Talathi report, and found that the notices were indeed served on 27.10.2003, and the award copy was received on 9.12.2003. The court held that the references filed on 9.12.2003 and 6.2.2004 were within the limitation period prescribed under Section 18(2) of the Act. The court set aside the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer and directed him to restore the references and decide them on merits in accordance with law. The revision application was allowed.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Limitation for Reference under Section 18 - Date of Service of Notice under Section 12(2) - The limitation period for filing a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 commences from the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or the date of knowledge of the award, whichever is later. In this case, notices under Section 12(2) were issued on 13.10.2003 but served on the petitioners on 27.10.2003 as per the Talathi report. The petitioners received the copy of the award on 9.12.2003 and filed references on the same day (petitioners 1-8) and on 6.2.2004 (petitioner 9). The Special Land Acquisition Officer erroneously rejected the references as time-barred without considering the actual date of service. Held that the references were within limitation and the order of rejection is set aside. (Paras 1-4) B) Land Acquisition - Reference under Section 18 - Rejection on Limitation - The Special Land Acquisition Officer rejected the references on 9.2.2004 on the ground that they were not filed within the period of limitation. However, the court found that the references were filed within six weeks from the date of receipt of the award copy (9.12.2003) and within the prescribed period under Section 18(2) of the Act. The court relied on the Talathi report dated 30.10.2003 to establish the actual date of service of notice. Held that the rejection was improper and the references must be restored. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the references filed by the petitioners under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were within the period of limitation, considering the date of service of notice under Section 12(2) and the date of receipt of copy of the award.
Final Decision
The revision application is allowed. The order dated 9.2.2004 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer rejecting the references is set aside. The Special Land Acquisition Officer is directed to restore the references to file and decide them on merits in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.
Law Points
- Limitation for reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 starts from date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or knowledge of award
- whichever is later
- date of payment of compensation is not relevant
- Talathi report can be relied upon to prove date of service
