HARI KRISHAN KHOSLA Vs. STATE OF PEPSU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN order to appreciate the points of law involved in this petition for revision, which has been referred to Division Bench by Gurnam Singh, J. , it is necessary to state the facts briefly. Under section 4 (1) of the Patiala and East Punjab States union Land Acquisition Act, 2006, Bk, (hereinafter called the Act) a notification was published on 14-2-1952, that the land in dispute was needed for a public purpose. Its notice was served on the petitioner on 24-3-1952. A declaration under section 7 that the land was required for public purposes was then issued on 1-4-1952. This was followed by a notice under section 10. On 22-11-1952, notice under Subsection 3 of the aforesaid section was served on the petitioner. On 9-3-1953, the land Acquisition Officer cave his award. The petitioner applied for a copy of the award on 14-3-1958, which was supplied to him on 8-4-1953, On 8-5-1953, he filed an application under Section 19 of the Act, requiring the Collector to make a reference to the Court.

(2.) ACCORDING to the proviso to Section 19 of the Act (which is the same as section 18 of Land Acquisition Act} an application requiring the Collector to make a reference to the Court on the matters specified in Sub-section 1 of Section 19 is to be made :

(3.) IT may be stated that sections 19, 20 and 21of the Act are identically the same as sections is, 19 and 20 respectively of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and, therefore, the decisions which have been given with regard to the questions involved on an interpretation of the sections of the Indian Act would be relevant and helpful in deciding the points that have arisen in this case. Part III of the Land acquisition Act provides for reference to Court and procedure thereon. Section 18 provides that any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter of referred for the determination of the Court whether his objection be to :