RAJESH KUMAR Vs. COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Land Acquisition Collector whereby his Reference Petition has been held to be barred by limitation. The records of the case were summoned and perused.

(2.) UNDISPUTEDLY , the impugned award was passed on 20.12.2012 and no notice was served upon the petitioner under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short 'the Act'). The petitioner withdrew the compensation on 01.01.2013 under protest and thereafter preferred petition under Section 18 of the Act on 19.03.2013. It is claimed by the petitioner that he was under the bonafide belief that since he has not received notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, therefore, the limitation for filing the Reference Petition would be six months. Accordingly, the petitioner preferred the petition but, as a matter of abundant caution, he also moved an application seeking condonation of delay. When the petition came up for consideration, the Collector below passed the following orders: -

(3.) THE State of Himachal Pradesh has carried out an amendment in Section 18 of the Act vide Himachal Pradesh Act 17 of 1986 which clearly provides for entertaining of applications under Section 18 by the Collector even after the expiry of six weeks but within a period of six months, if he is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application in time. Section 18 of the Act reads as follows: -