P CHINNAIAH DIED Vs. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LA NELLORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The important question of law which arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to whether in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), can a claimant plead for quashing the Award itself on any ground?

(2.) These writ petitions raise a common point of law. The properties of the petitioners were acquired by invoking the provisions of the Act for laying a road from Krishnapuram to Muthyalapalem in Nellore Town. Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act was issued in the year 1980 by invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Act. The Award was passed on 21-9-1986. The petitioners did not accept the quantum of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and sought for a reference under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of the compensation. Accordingly, the Land Acquisition Officer i.e. the 1st respondent herein made a reference to the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Nellore, the 2nd respondent herein and three references were numbered as O.P.Nos. 109, 114, and 115 of 1987. While the O.Ps. were pending, after a lapse of 6 years, 3 interlocutory applications were filed in I.A Nos. 57, 58 and 60 of 1993. The said I As nave been filed purporting to be under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC seeking amendment of the original petitions. The amendment sought for is to quash the award itself on the ground that as two years lapsed from the date of draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act, Section 11 -A of the Act which was incorporated by Amendment Act 68 of 1984 came into operation and that the award was a nullity as having been passed after two years of draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act. The Court of the Subordinate Judge, Nellore has dismissed the said I.As, aggrieved by which, these writ petitions have been filed.

(3.) Mr. Y. Narasimha Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contends that as admittedly, draft declaration under Section 6 was issued in the year 1980 and the award was passed on 21-9-1986, Section 11-A of the Act operated and the award was a nullity and that the court-below has grossly erred in not allowing the amendment of the pleading sought for. At the first instance, the averment is unsustainable. In the instant case, urgency clause was invoked dispensing with Section 5-A enquiry and possession having been taken-over, Section 11-A of the Act is not applicable at all.