SANTOSH KUMARI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition, the Petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.11.2007, passed by the learned Additional District Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala refusing to decide the reference filed by the Petitioner on the ground that since the Land Acquisition Collector, Dehra held that the reference petition was not made within the period of limitation, the collector should have first decided the question of limitation and only thereafter could have made the reference.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that some land was acquired by the State for construction of parking at Mata Chintpurni Temple, pursuant to the orders of this Court. The Petitioner claimed to be owner of the land alongwith some other persons to whom compensation had to be paid. According to the Petitioner, no notice was issued to her, but she came to know that some award is being passed and, therefore, she had filed an application (Annexure P2) with the Land Acquisition Collector, Dehra on 23.7.2007 praying that the award be also passed in her favour. On the same day (23.7.2007) the award was passed and some amount was awarded in favour of the Petitioner also. The case of the Petitioner is that the award was never pronounced in her presence. According to the Petitioner, she later came to know about the passing of the award and thereafter applied for the copy of the award on 26th July, 2007 which was delivered to her on 29th August, 2007. Thereafter on 21st September, 2007 the Petitioner filed a petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Land Acquisition Collector for making a reference to the learned District Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala for enhancement of the compensation.

(3.) If the award is pronounced in the presence of the parties, then limitation to file a petition under Section 18 of the Act is 42 days as per Section 18 (2)(a). If the award is not announced in the presence of the parties, then the limitation is six weeks from the date of receipt of notice of the Collector under Section 12(2) or within six months from the date of award. The case of the Petitioner is that in the reference petition she has clearly mentioned that she was not present when the award was pronounced. According to her, she only later came to know about the award and, therefore, she could have filed the reference petition within six months of the award and her further case is that the time spent for obtaining copy of the award must be deducted, while computing the period of 42 days under Section 18(2).