Case Note & Summary
The revision applicant, Subhash Babulal Rajput, owned 1 Hector 20 Ares of land in Gat No. 27, village Gandheshwar, Taluka Khultabad, District Aurangabad. The land was acquired by the respondent authorities for the Gandheshwar Minor Irrigation Project under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 08-06-2000 granting compensation at Rs.505/- per Are. Dissatisfied with the compensation, the applicant filed a Land Acquisition Reference under Section 18 of the Act before the 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad, being L.A.R. No. 550 of 2000. On 14-06-2004, the Reference Court dismissed the reference on the ground that the applicant had not led any evidence to show that the compensation was inadequate. The applicant then filed an application for setting aside the dismissal and restoration of the reference, being M.A.R.J.I. No. 755 of 2006, which was rejected by the 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad on 11-12-2009. Aggrieved by both orders, the applicant filed the present Civil Revision Application. The High Court heard the counsel for the applicant and the Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1. The applicant's counsel argued that the dismissal was without giving an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice, and that the reference should have been decided on merits. The High Court found that the Reference Court had dismissed the reference without affording the applicant an opportunity to lead evidence, which was a serious procedural error. The Court held that the dismissal order was unsustainable and set aside both the impugned orders, restoring L.A.R. No. 550 of 2000 to the file of the Reference Court for fresh adjudication on merits. The Court directed the Reference Court to decide the reference expeditiously, preferably within six months, and to give the applicant an opportunity to lead evidence. The Civil Revision Application was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Dismissal of Reference for Default - Opportunity of Hearing - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 4, 18 - The Reference Court dismissed the claimant's reference under Section 18 on the ground that no evidence was led to show inadequacy of compensation. The High Court held that the dismissal without giving an opportunity to lead evidence violated principles of natural justice, and restored the reference for fresh adjudication on merits. (Paras 3-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the dismissal of a Land Acquisition Reference for want of evidence without giving the claimant an opportunity to lead evidence violates principles of natural justice and warrants restoration.
Final Decision
The Civil Revision Application is allowed. The judgment and order dated 14-06-2004 passed by the 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad in L.A.R. No. 550 of 2000 and the judgment and order dated 11-12-2009 passed by the 4th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad in M.A.R.J.I. No. 755 of 2006 are set aside. L.A.R. No. 550 of 2000 is restored to the file of the Reference Court for fresh adjudication on merits. The Reference Court is directed to decide the reference expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of the order, and to give the applicant an opportunity to lead evidence. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- opportunity of hearing
- restoration of dismissed reference
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
