VENKATESH Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Perused the order under challenge in this writ petition. Land measuring 33 guntas in Sy. No. 106/2 belonging to the petitioner was acquired for the purpose of canal erection in the year 2003. An award came to be passed and notice of award was also issued to the petitioner. Petitioner not being satisfied with the award sought for reference to Civil Court by submitting a representation to the Special Land Acquisition Officer-1st respondent. Reference was not made and after a period of three years, an application was filed before the jurisdictional Civil Court seeking for direction to the Deputy Commissioner/Special Land Acquisition Officer to refer the claim under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'). On service of notice, Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the beneficiary appeared and statement of objections was filed on behalf of Special Land Acquisition Officer contending inter alia that petition filed seeking for reference is barred by limitation.

(2.) Claimant got himself examined as PW. 1 and got produced two documents namely reference petition and certified copy of award passed in LAC No. 401/2012. On behalf of respondents, no evidence was tendered and by consent of learned advocates, copy of the award came to be produced and marked as Ex. R1. After considering the pleadings and on evaluation of evidence, reference Court rejected the petition as having been filed after the period of limitation is over. In other words, reference Court held that petition is time barred. It is this order passed in LAC No. 191/2010 on 20.04.2013 by the 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkot which is impugned in the present writ petition.

(3.) It is the contention of Sri. Anand Kumar Kolli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/claimant that petitioner had filed an application on 19.02.2007 before Land Acquisition Officer which was well within the time as per proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Act namely it was filed within 90 days from the date of service of award notice under sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act. Hence, he contends that delay if any on the part of Special Land Acquisition Officer to make reference to Civil Court cannot be attributed to the petitioner and as such, right of petitioner to claim enhanced compensation cannot be truncated. As such, he contends that impugned order be set aside and petition be allowed and Deputy Commissioner/Land Acquisition Officer be directed to refer the papers to reference Court under Section 18 of the Act for being adjudicated on merits to award enhanced compensation.