UNION OF INDIA Vs. KRISHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition takes exception to the award passed by the Collector in exercise of his powers under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'Act').

(2.) The land of the respondents comprised in Khatauni No.1551/1762, Kha sra No. 5984/5297, measuring 2 bighas, Khasra No. 6136/5985/5297, measuring 1 bigha and the land comprised in Khasra No.5950/5351, measuring 6-3 bighas, situated in Mauza Fatti Nirmand, Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?Yes District Kullu, H.P. was acquired by the petitioner for setting up an Army base for defence purposes at village Averi, Tehsil Nirmand, District Kullu, H.P. On 19.03.1998, the Collector announced the award in case No.1/98. Certain land owners whose land was covered under the same notification filed reference petition for enhancement of the award which eventually came to be decided by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur, on 21.02.2004 and the award was enhanced to Rs.60,000/- per bigha. Whereas, the respondents had been paid compensation of Rs.31,500/- per bigha for 'Bakhal Charand' and Rs.51,000/- per bigha for 'Bakhal Som'. Since the land of the respondents was acquired under the same notification and they had not sought reference, they filed applications under Section 28-A of the Act before the Land Acquisition Collector, Anni, on 19.04.2004, however, the Collector kept these applications in abeyance because the petitioner had preferred an appeal against the order of the learned District Judge.

(3.) Upon notice to the petitioners, they filed reply wherein they raised the question of limitation. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 16.03.2012 allowed the application filed by the respondents. It is this award that has been assailed by the petitioner mainly on the ground that the applications preferred by the respondents under Section 28-A were time barred and could not have been entertained, more especially when the reference pertaining to the same notification was decided by the learned District Judge on 22.02.2003 in Reference No.40-R/4 of 1999.