NATWARLAL SOMALAL RAWAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 7/6/1988 recorded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Himatnagar, in not making a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act) to the District Court for adjudication. Impugned decision is rendered essentially on the ground of delay in making application for reference, which is passed on 17/6/1988 by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The Officer concerned has from the facts found that there was delay and, therefore, application for reference came to be rejected, which is precisely under challenge before us in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. There is no dispute about the fact that the reference application of the petitioner u/S. 18 of the Act is dated 2/5/1988. The award of the Land Acquisition officer was declared on 25/1/1988. It is the case of the petitioners that they were intimated by one notice dated 2/3/1988. Petitioners content that certified copy of such an award was applied for on 9/3/1988, which was received on 4/4/1988 and thereafter they applied to the Special Land Acquisition Officer u/S. 18 of the Act to make reference to the concerned District Court. In short, the plea advanced on behalf of the petitioners has been that in the aforesaid circumstances there was no delay in making an application for reference u/S. 18 of the Act.

(2.) In this connection, it will be interesting and expedient to look into the provisions of section 18 of the Act, which provides a provision for reference to Court. It reads as under :- '18. Reference to Court.-

(3.) Sub-section (2) of section 18 of the Act provides that the application shall state the grounds on which the objections to the award of Land Acquisition Officer are proposed to be taken. It has to be in writing. It has to be preferred within a period of limitation prescribed in section 18. Such an application is required to be made if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award, but in any other cases within six weeks of the receipt of the notice of the Collector u/S. 12 (2) or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period is going to expire first. The mechanism of sub-section (2) of section 18 prescribes time frame, which must be adhered to, about which there is no controversy in this petition.