N.L.Untwalia, J.

1. These two Civil Revision applications are by the same set of petitioners. In Land Acquisition Case Nos. 10 and 12 of 1969, pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Madhipura, the petitioners applied under Order 1, Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure to be added as parties as those lands belong to them and they were entitled to the compensation money. The learned Subordinate Judge has rejected their applications. They have, therefore, come up to this Court in revision.

2. Prima facie, the learned Subordinate Judge has held that the petitioners have no claim to the land or the compensation money. That apart. I think, they are not entitled to be added as parties to the land acquisition cases. They had not made their claims before the Collector. It may well be that no notice under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 , hereinafter called the "Act", was served on them. Yet as pointed out by the Supreme Court in Dr. G. H. Grant V/s. The State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 237, they could ask the Collector to make a reference under Sec.30 of the Act. If they would have raised a dispute before the Collector earlier, they had a right to ask him to make a reference under S