DESINGBHAI VIRIYABHAI RATHWA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the communication dtd. 24/10/2024 whereby the application under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (old Act), filed by the petitioner in the month of July, 2024 and October, 2024 in respect of the land in question has been rejected on the ground of limitation. In order to assail the reasoning given in the communication dtd. 24/10/2024 sent to the petitioner rejecting the application under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1894"), it is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the purchaser of the lands in question by way of two registered sale deeds executed in the year 2008. The acquisition notifications under the land acquisition Act, 1894 came to be published in the year 2009-10. The award with respect to the land in question came to be made on 10/10/2012. 2.1. As there was a dispute pertaining to the ownership of the land in question and the question as to who was entitled for disbursement of compensation, on the objections raised by the petitioner about the name of the original owner being reflected in the award, the matter was referred under Ss. 30 and 31 of the Act, 1894 and was registered as LAR Case No. 460 of 2013. It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner had filed an objection on 15/7/2011 by filing a written objection against reflection of the name of the original owner throughout acquisition process and requested the Special Land Acquisition Officer, namely respondent no. 3 not to pass any award in favour of the original owner without hearing the petitioner herein. The petitioner had also filed a Regular Civil Suit No. 13 of 2010 challenging the subsequent sale deed dtd. 15/12/2009 executed by the original owner, but the same was also disposed of as withdrawn vide judgment and order dtd. 8/7/2017.

(3.) The contention is that the registered sale deeds executed in favour of the petitioner had never been challenged by any person nor there is any such proceeding pending as on date. With this contention, it is sought to be submitted that the reference made under Ss. 30 and 31 of the Act, 1894 had been decided by the Court concerned vide judgment and order dtd. 15/6/2024. After decision on the reference wherein entitlement of the petitioner to the compensation amount has been determined, the petitioner immediately rushed to challenge the determination made under the original award dtd. 10/10/2012 by filing an application under Sec. 18 of the Act, 1894.