Back
JUDGMENT :
HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
1. Both the petitions are filed challenging the orders passed by the Collector refusing to entertain the statutory applications under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Settlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “Right to Fair Compensation Act”) for making reference to the competent Court of the land owners, who have raised dispute pertaining to the quantum of compensation that has been awarded in pursuance to the land acquired by respondent Nos.3 and 4.
2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the reference applications of the petitioners in Writ Petition No.1508 of 2026 and Writ Petition No.1509 of 2026 have been rejected by respondent No.3 on the ground of delay of 67 and 337 days respectively. Learned Advocate for the petitioners further submits that the impugned orders rejecting the applications for condonation of delay and thereby dismissing the reference applications are bad in law, as the learned Collector is competent enough under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation Act to consider the cause made out by the petitioners in delay applica
The authority must provide justifiable reasons when refusing to condone delay in processing compensation claims, ensuring compliance with statutory requirements and protecting substantive rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority cannot condone delay beyond the maximum statutory period as prescribed by the relevant provisions of the Act of 2013.
The provision for seeking condonation of delay under Section 64(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation And Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 influenced the cou....
The limitation period for applications under Section 64 of the Act is calculated from the date of the modified award, not the original award.
The period for seeking reference under the Land Acquisition Act runs from the date of knowledge of the award, ensuring fairness in the process.
The Referral Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a reference made outside the statutory limit prescribed by the Land Acquisition Act, reinforcing the mandatory nature of compliance with statutory t....
Determination of amount of compensation – Reference to appropriate authority – Collector has no jurisdiction to go into such question.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
