Pali Ram and Others vs State of Haryana

G.C. Garg, J.—The petitioners aggrieved by the order of the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate, Panchkula whereby he refused to refer the application u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short the ''Act'') to the District Judge have filed the present revision.

Award was given by the Collector on September 23, 1986. The petitioners who are claimants moved an application dated September 8,1989 received in the office of the Land Acquisition Collector on September 14, 1988 seeking reference u/s 18 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector by the impugned order declined to refer the reference by observing that the application was barred by time by one year and 357 days. It is how the present revision came to be filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Land Acquisition Collector passed the impugned order in the absence of any notice to the petitioners and even otherwise, the Collector could not enter into the merits of the application including limitation and he was duly bound to refer the application of the petitioners to the District Judge leaving it open to the respondent-State of Haryana, to raise the question of limitation before the District Judge.

Learned counsel for the parties have been heard at some length.

It could not be disputed that it was not for the Collector to decide, whether the application for reference was within limitation or was barred by time. It was a matter to be raised by the aggrieved party before the reference court who would have answered the same according to law. The Collector in the circumstance should have referred the matter to the District Judge leaving the question of limitation open so that the parties could lead evidence on this point before the question could be decided. For the aforesaid view I am supported by the decision of this Court in Dharam Pal v. The Collector Land Acquisition Urban Development, Punjab S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) 1987 PLJ 263.

In the situation aforesaid, the revision succeeds and is allowed and the impugnedorder is set aside. The Land Acquisition Collector, Panchkula is directed to refer the application u/s 18 of the Act moved by the petitioners and received in his office on September 14, 1988, to the District Judge concerned in accordance with law, within two months from today. It is, however, made clear that it will be open to the respondent-State of Haryana to raise the question of limitation before the District Judge and if such a question is raised, the District Judge will pronounce upon the same in accordance with law. No costs.