JUDGMENT :

Devashis Baruah, J.

1. Heard Mr. Tali Ao, learned counsel for the petitioner, assisted by Mr. Limawapang, learned counsel and Mr. T.B. Jamir, learned Senior Addl. A.G. appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as well as Mr. Diezeseilie Nagi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4.

2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is challenging the order dated 08.05.2019, passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dimapur, Nagaland in Land Acquisition Reference Case No. 01/2016. From a perusal of the said order, it reveals that the reference proceedings originates under Section 12(1) of the Nagaland Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1965. It further appears from the said order that the award dated 21.04.2015 was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Peren, who is the Collector of the said district, by which a compensation amount of Rs. 1,25,65,500/- was awarded and vide the said award, the Deputy Commissioner had apportioned an amount of Rs. 95,65,500/- to Kejanglwa Village and Rs. 32,00,000/- to Old Jalukie Village, i.e. the petitioner herein as well as the respondent No. 4. Being aggrieved by the award dated 21.04.2015, both the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 herein, submitted application under Section 12(1)(a) to the Deputy Commissioner praying for referring the matter to the Court. It further appears from the said order that the Deputy Commissioner, Peren did not make the reference for which two writ petitions, being WP (C) No. 81(K)/2015 and WP (C) No. 107(K)/2015 were filed by both the petitioner and the respondent No. 4 praying for a direction to the Deputy Commissioner, Peren to refer the dispute relating to payment of compensation for the land measuring 3715.18 acres to the Court in terms of Section 12(1) of the Act, 1965. This Court, by the judgment and order dated 03.08.2015 disposed of the said two writ petitions directing the Deputy Commissioner, Peren to refer the matter in terms of Section 12(1) of the Act of 1965. Subsequent thereto, vide communication dated 27.04.2016, the Deputy Commissioner made a reference in terms with Section 12(1) of the Act and the terms of the said reference as stated in the said communication dated 27.04.2016 is quoted herein-below:

“That the terms of reference as may be decided by the Hon'ble Civil Court may be stated below:

(a) As to whether in terms of the various judgments and orders of the courts, which village has the right of title on the land acquired by the government immediately before it was acquired?

(b) As to who were in possession, occupation and enjoyment of the land acquired by the government immediately before it was acquired? If so, what was the basis of possession, occupation and enjoyment?

(c) As to whether in facts as well as in law which village is the rightful owner of the land immediately before it was acquired by the government?

(d) As to whether the land owner village is entitled for any enhanced compensation? If so, on what basis and what are the amounts?”

3. Vide the impugned order dated 08.05.2019, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dimapur, Nagaland had held that as the reference case is in a reference made under Section 12(1) of the Act of 1965, which is still in force and as such, the prayer made by the parties for assessment of the compensation in terms with the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (herein after referred to as the Act of 2013) is beyond the scope of terms of reference made to the Court and the parties were given the liberty to approach the appropriate forum for enforcement of the Act of 2013, if so advised. It is against the said direction made in the order dated 08.05.2019, that the petitioner is before this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide the communication dated 27.04.2016, the Deputy Commissioner had made a reference