SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise out of references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act (1 of 1894) notice was given by the Collector to the appellants that Government intended to take possession of their land for the purpose of a market at Muzaffar Nagar. Both the appellants replied to this notice stating that they were not willing to give the land for the construction of the market and that no public market was required. They further stated that they had submitted a memorial to the Provincial Government asking for proceedings to be stayed pending the decision of their memorial. Various other reasons were given in this application against the acquisition of the land for the purpose of the market. It was also stated that the market value of the land was not less than Rs. 1,000 par bigha kham, The Collector held proceedings and made an award under Section 12 of the Act. Under sub Section (2) of Section 12 he gave notice of his award to the appellants. Under Section 18 it was open to the appellants by written application to the Collector to require that the matter of the award should be referred for the determination of the District Judge.

(2.) The application was bound to state also the grounds on which the objection to award was taken. The appellants submitted on the 4 and 12 respectively of July applications made under Section 18 of the Act, requiring the matter of the award to be referred to the District Judge. The District Judge has held, however, that these applications, though acted upon by the Collector, did not comply with the law, and consequently

(3.) It he had no jurisdiction to entertain (Sic) reference. Neither of the applications contained any request that the matter of the award should be referred for the determination of the District Judge. They asked that the matter relating to compensation should be postponed until the final decision as to the propriety or legality of Government in acquiring the land for the mandi has been settled by a competent Court. They also mentioned that the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector was low and was not accepted.