CHANDRAKUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of Learned Counsel appearing for the parties, the appeal is heard finally.

(2.) This appeal has been preferred under Sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (henceforth 'the Act ') being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 30/7/2021 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa in Miscellaneous Civil Suit No.79 of 2005.

(3.) Facts of the case, in short, are that for construction of a sub-canal at Amandula, a proceeding was initiated by the Land Acquisition Officer, Sakti under the Act. A case was registered as Land Acquisition Case No.102/A-82/2002-03 and an award was passed on 26/8/2003, which was duly approved by the Collector on 3/9/2003. In the said proceeding, Budhram 's land was also acquired and he was awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.34,552.00 treating his land as non-irrigated land instead of irrigated one. In this regard, Budhram moved his objection vide Ex.P4 and P5 dtd. 31/10/2003 and 31/12/2003, respectively. Despite the said objection, it was not referred by the Land Acquisition Officer to the Court having jurisdiction for its determination. Thereafter, Budhram further made an application on 8/2/2005. Thereafter, it was referred by the Collector to the Reference Court, i.e., the Court of Additional District Judge. The Reference Court, vide judgment dtd. 22/9/2005, rejected the reference petition preferred under Sec. 18(2) of the Act holding the reference petition to be barred by time. Against the said judgment of the Reference Court, an appeal was preferred before this Court by Budhram which was registered as F.A. No.76 of 2006. Vide judgment dtd. 23/6/2020, this Court set aside the judgment dtd. 22/9/2005 passed by the Additional District Judge/Reference Court in Miscellaneous Civil Suit No.79 of 2005 and remitted the matter back to the Reference Court with a direction to decide the objection raised by Applicant Budhram on 31/10/2003 (Ex.P4) only with regard to the following points: