Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Tukaram Janaba Patil, aged 96, owned agricultural lands in Gut no.1274 and 1277 at Village Kalkundri, Taluka Chandgad, District Kolhapur. These lands were acquired by the respondents for a Minor Irrigation tank project, and an award dated 31st March 1999 granted compensation of Rs.77,700/-. A neighboring landowner, whose land was acquired under the same award, filed a Land Acquisition Reference No.234 of 1999, and the Reference Court enhanced compensation by judgment and award dated 8th August 2008. The petitioner then filed an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 1st November 2008 seeking re-determination of compensation. However, the petitioner could not file a certified copy of the Reference Court's judgment and award, but filed a true copy. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (Respondent No.2) rejected the application on 14th February 2019 solely on the ground that it was not supported by certified copies. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The court noted that the application was filed within the limitation period and that the petitioner had substantially complied with the requirements. The court held that the requirement of filing a certified copy under Section 28A is directory, not mandatory, and the authority should have given an opportunity to produce the certified copy. The court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration on merits, directing the petitioner to produce the certified copy within four weeks. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Section 28A Application - Requirement of Certified Copy - The court considered whether rejection of an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for want of certified copy is sustainable when a true copy was filed. The court held that the requirement of certified copy is directory and not mandatory, and the authority should have given an opportunity to produce the certified copy. The impugned order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 can be rejected solely on the ground that it was not accompanied by a certified copy of the judgment and award of the Reference Court, when a true copy was filed.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 14th February 2019 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to Respondent No.2 for fresh consideration on merits. The petitioner is directed to produce the certified copy of the judgment and award dated 8th August 2008 within four weeks. The writ petition is allowed. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- requirement of certified copy
- substantial compliance
- liberal interpretation
- remand for reconsideration
