STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. JAYANTILAL NARSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Gujarat has preferred these appeals under Sec 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') to challenge the judgment and award made by Civil Judge (S.D.), Rajkot dated 18-11-2000 in Land Reference Case Nos. 422 to 425 of 1989. Since, these appeals involve common questions of fact and law, they are heard together and now they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The respondents are the original claimants. They owned agricultural lands at village Adbalka. These lands were needed for construction of Aji-II Irrigation Scheme Main Canal. Hence, proceedings under the Act to acquire the land were initiated. Notification under Sec. 4 was published in the Government Gazette on 22-9-1983 and the declaration under Sec. 6 was published on 20-9-1984. Thereafter, all the necessary formalities were complied with by the Deputy Collector acting as Land Acquisition Officer and published the award under Sec. 11 of the Act on 17-6-1985. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the land at Re. 0-90 paise per sq. mtr. The respondents, being dissatisfied with the award, made application under Sec. 18 of the Act for making reference to the Civil Court for enhancement of the compensation. The Collector, after completing necessary formalities, forwarded the statement and relevant record along with the application for reference under Sec. 19 of the Act to the concerned Court, and ultimately proceedings were numbered as Land Reference Case Nos. 422 to 425 of 1989.

(3.) I have heard Mr. Uday R. Bhatt, learned A.G.P. for the appellant. The respondents though served, have not remained present either in person or through their Advocate. Mr. Bhatt has submitted that the award made by the Court is exorbitant. He has submitted that the Court failed to consider relevant material to decide the question of limitation. According to him, the reference cases were clearly time-barred. He has submitted that so far as the Collector is concerned, he is the authority to decide whether application of the claimant for reference under Sec. 18 deserved to be accepted and acted upon. For that purpose he is required to scrutinize the material and only upon finding everything proper, should make the reference. According to Mr. Bhatt, even the Court is saddled with the duty to scrutinize the entire material and then to decide controversies involved in the case. To substantiate his submission, Mr. Bhatt has drawn my attention to relevant provisions of the Act as well as certain circulars and directions issued by the Government from time to time. He has also relied on judicial decisions rendered by this Court as well as the Apex Court. He has, therefore, prayed that the case be remanded to the concerned Court for its re-consideration by keeping in view the relevant material.