KHAJA EDUCATION SOCIETY GULBARGA Vs. ASST COMMISSIONER AND LAO; EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD; DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have called into question the order, dated 25-07-2013 passed by the Court of III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gulbarga dismissing Misc. No.39/2008, filed under Section 18(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the ground that the petition is not filed within the period of three years from the date of knowledge of award.

(2.) Sri Harshavardhan R. Malipatil, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were never served with the award notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. He submits that the service of notice has to be as per the procedure, prescribed by Section 45 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Order 29 Rule 2 of CPC. He submits that the award notice (Ex.R-2) does not even contain the correct date of passing of the award. He submits that the said award notice does not even disclose that a copy of the award is annexed to it.

(3.) Sri Malipatil relies on the Apex Court's judgment in the case of PREMJI NATHU VS. STATE OF GUJARAT,2012 SAR(Civ) 413 for advancing the submission that once claimant pleads no knowledge of the award proceedings and the notice the onus is on the Land Acquisition Officer to establish that the claimant had received a notice under Section 12(2) of the said Act. He also relies on the said authority for advancing the contention that if the award notice is not accompanied by a copy of the award, then the exercise of right vested in the claimant to seek the reference under Section 18(1) of the said Act would not be effective.