Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Ashok Ganaba N. Gaonkar, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 28.01.2011 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Salauli Irrigation Project, Margao, which rejected his application dated 07.12.2011 for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as time-barred. The Land Acquisition Officer held that Section 28-A applies only to persons who make an application after the passing of the order by the court in a reference under Section 18, and not after an appellate court judgment. The petitioner sought to file the application from the date of the judgment of the Supreme Court in an appeal preferred by another claimant. The High Court, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Jose Antonio Cruz Dos R. Rodrigues & anr. vs. Land Acquisition Collector & anr., (1996) 6 SCC 746, held that the expression 'the court' in Section 28-A includes appellate courts, and the limitation period of three months runs from the date of the final judgment of the appellate court. The court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to consider the petitioner's application on merits within three months.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Re-determination of Compensation - Section 28-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Limitation - The limitation for filing an application under Section 28-A runs from the date of the final award or decree of the court, which includes the judgment of the appellate court (High Court or Supreme Court) in a reference under Section 18, and not merely from the award of the reference court. The court held that the expression 'the court' in Section 28-A includes appellate courts, and the period of limitation of three months must be computed from the date of the final appellate judgment. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the limitation period for filing an application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for re-determination of compensation runs from the date of the award of the reference court under Section 18 or from the date of the judgment of the appellate court (including the Supreme Court) in a reference matter.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the order dated 28.01.2011 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to consider the petitioner's application for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on its own merits within three months from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Section 28-A of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- limitation for re-determination of compensation
- date of award or decree of court
- appellate court judgment
- reference under Section 18
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (08) 110
Writ Petition No.366 of 2011
Mr. S. N. Vernekar for Petitioner, Mr. Amey Kakodkar for Respondents
Mr. Ashok Ganaba N. Gaonkar
The State of Goa, Through its Chief Secretary; The Executive Engineer W.R. D. W.D.XI, Government of Goa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging rejection of application for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as time-barred.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of order dated 28.01.2011 and direction to consider his application for re-determination of compensation on merits.
Filing Reason
Land Acquisition Officer rejected petitioner's application under Section 28-A as time-barred, holding that limitation runs from date of reference court award, not from date of Supreme Court judgment.
Previous Decisions
Land Acquisition Officer passed order dated 28.01.2011 rejecting petitioner's application as time-barred.
Issues
Whether the limitation period for filing an application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, runs from the date of the award of the reference court under Section 18 or from the date of the judgment of the appellate court (including the Supreme Court) in a reference matter.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the application under Section 28-A was filed within three months from the date of the Supreme Court judgment, which is the final court in the reference proceedings.
Respondents contended that Section 28-A applies only to applications made after the award of the reference court under Section 18, and not after appellate court judgments.
Ratio Decidendi
The expression 'the court' in Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, includes appellate courts such as the High Court and the Supreme Court. The limitation period of three months for filing an application under Section 28-A runs from the date of the final judgment of the appellate court, not from the date of the award of the reference court under Section 18.
Judgment Excerpts
Section 28-A was inserted as the last section in Part III entitled 'Reference to Court and Procedure thereon' by Act 68 of 1984.
Therefore, the court referred to under Section 18 can only mean the principal civil court of original jurisdiction.
The Apex Court in a Judgment reported in 1996 (6) S.C.C. 746 in the case of Jose Antonio Cruz Dos R. Rodrigues & anr. vs. Land Acquisition Collector & anr., has stated at para 3 thus: ...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed an application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on 07.12.2011 for re-determination of compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer rejected the application by order dated 28.01.2011 as time-barred. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition challenging that order.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 28-A, Section 18, Section 11, Section 23, Section 2(d)
