JAGARNATH LALL Vs. LAND ACQUISITION DEPUTY COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for revision of an order passed by the Land Acquisition Deputy Collector of Patna refusing to refer an objection to an award for determination by the Civil Court. The case first came before Wort J., who, owing to a conflict of authority, referred it to a Division Bench. A Bench, consisting of James and Chatterji JJ., referred the case to the Chief Justice with a recommendation that it should be heard by a larger Bench. Accordingly the case has been argued before this Special Bench. Proceedings for the compulsory acquisition of certain land in the Patna District took place before the Land Acquisition Deputy Collector of Patna, who was authorized to exercise the powers of the Collector, and in due course he made his award under Section 11, Land Acquisition Act (Act 1 of 1894).

(2.) By his award he awarded to the tenant a sum of Rupees 4917-12-0, to the proprietors a sum of Rupees 99-12-0 and to the tenure-holders Rs. 452. The present petitioner, who held a four annas share in the tenure, objected to the award and claimed a reference to the Civil Court. The Land Acquisition Deputy Collector was of opinion that the objections of the petitioner were frivolous and were made with a view to harass thS tenant. He declined to refer the matter to the Civil Court: hence the present application for revision. Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, provides that any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.

(3.) The application must state the grounds upon which the objection to the award is taken, and provided the objection is within time, the Collector must refer the matter to the Civil Court. In my view, the wording of Section 18(1) leaves the Collector no alternative but to refer the matter if the application is made within the periods prescribed by the Section and is not barred by proviso 2 to Section 31 of the Act. It follows therefore that the Land Acquisition Deputy Collector of Patna had no right whatsoever to refuse to refer the matter on the ground that the objections were not bona fide and were frivolous. It is to be observed that Rule 107 of the Executive Instructions issued by the Board of Revenue for this Province for the guidance of the Collectors, makes it clear that a reference to the Court, on receipt of an application under Section 18, is obligatory, unless the application is barred by the provisos to Section 18 or by proviso 2 to Section 31. However, in spite of the provisions of the Act and this instruction the Deputy Collector declined to make a reference.