JUDGMENT

Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Mrs. G.L. Deshpande, learned AGP waives service on behalf of the respondent - State. At the joint request of learned counsels appearing for the parties, the matter is heard finally at the admission stage.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14. 08.2012 dismissing the reference for non prosecution.

3. Heard Mr. N.D. Kendre, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mrs. G. L. Deshpande, AGP for the respondent - State.

4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution. He would further urge that the reference Court has not decided the claim on merits and dismissed the reference on the ground that the claimant has not bothered to pursue the matter for establishing his claim and has thus failed to adduce any evidence for the purpose of redetermination of the market value of the acquired property. As such, he would contend that the order passed by the Reference Court is liable to be quashed and set aside and the matter be remanded for consideration afresh. On the ground of delay in filing the present petition which is filed in the year 2023 whereas the order has been passed in the year 2012, he would submit that the reference was filed by the aged father of the petitioner who expired on 09.05.2018 and the petitioner till September-2022 was not aware about the reference proceedings. Thereafter one of similarly placed villagers enquired about the matter with the concerned advocate, who gave information about the petitioner's reference and thereafter the petitioner acquired knowledge about the proceedings and has approached this Court.

5. Per contra, learned AGP submits that the present Petition has been filed to avoid payment of Court fees. The learned AGP would further contend that there is considerable delay in filing the present Petition and no sufficient explanation has been tendered. The learned AGP would contend that in reference proceedings, the burden was upon the claimant to adduce evidence showing that the compensation awarded in respect of the acquired property was inadequate and insufficient, but the claimant has not adduced evidence in support of his claim. The attention of this Court is invited to the provisions of Order-XVII, Rule-2 and 3 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and it is submitted that the procedure prescribed under the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short 'Code'), the reference Court has proceeded to dispose of the suit in accordance with the provisions of Order-IX of the Code.

6. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it is necessary to refer to Section 18 of the Act which contemplates reference to Court by a person who has not accepted the Award and reads thus:

'18. Reference to Court.- (1) 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 person to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.

(2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken:

Provided that every such application shall be made,-

(a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award;

(b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under section 12, sub-section

(2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire.'

7. Section 53 of the Land Acquisition Act provides that save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in this Ac