SUKHVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners pray for a direction to respondent No. 2, Land Acquisition Collector, to make reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the District Judge, by quashing his order dated April 17, 1984 (Annexure P.3).

(2.) SOME land of the petitioners was acquired. The Land Acquisition Collector announced the award on May 11, 1983, Objections under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act were filed on October 17, 1983. However, vide Annexure P.3, the petitioners were communicated the order of the Land Acquisition Collector dated April 19, 1984 that the application was filed as time -barred. The case of the petitioners is that they were not present at the time of announcement of the award. No notice under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued to them and thus their objection/application to make a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was within time and Land Acquisition Collector did not issue any notice to them before passing the impugned order. These allegations are supported by affidavit of Sukhvinder Singh, one of the petitioners. Although the respondents are represented, no reply to the petition has been filed controverting the allegations of the petitioners as referred to above. The relevant records concerning the case have also not been produced. That being the position, the allegations levelled in the petition are taken as established. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act reads as under: -

(3.) SINCE in the present case, the petitioners were not present or represented at the time the Land Acquisition Collector announced the award nor they were served with any notice under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act, in their case they could present the application under section 18 of the Act within six months from the date of the Collector's award and the petition could not be dismissed as barred by time.