JUDGMENT :

1. This is an appeal filed under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter called the Act) against the judgment and award dated 25.02.2022 passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Nagaon in Ref. (LA) Case No. 1/2018. The appellant in this case is the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon.

2. I have heard Shri R. Borpujari, learned counsel for the appellant. I have also heard Shri Hareshwar Borah as well as Smti Madhumita Borah, the respondent nos. 1 and 2, who are appearing in person.

3. It appears from the case records and the order sheets that on the maintainability of the appeal, a preliminary objection has been raised questioning the locus of the Deputy Commissioner to maintain such an appeal. Accordingly, this Court vide an order dated 24.11.2022 had fixed the matter for hearing on the said issue.

4. In an attempt to persuade this Court that the Deputy Commissioner has the locus, certain provisions of the Act in question has been referred to. Under Section 3(f), Authority has been defied which reads as follows:

“Authority” means the Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority established under section 51.”

5. Section 51 is with regard to Establishment of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority which is also extracted hereinbelow along with the contents of Section 52 regarding Composition of Authority and Section 53 regarding Qualifications for Appointment as Presiding officer:

“51. Establishment of Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority.-

(1) The appropriate Government shall, for the purpose of providing speedy disposal of disputes relating to land acquisition, compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement, establish, by notification, one or more Authorities to be known as "the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority" to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on it by or under this Act.

(2) The appropriate Government shall also specify in the notification referred to in sub-section (1) the areas within which the Authority may exercise jurisdiction for entertaining and deciding the references made to it under Section 64 or applications made by the applicant under second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 64.

52. Composition of Authority.-

(1) The Authority shall consist of one person only (hereinafter referred to as the Presiding Officer) to be appointed, by notification, by the appropriate Government.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the appropriate Government may authorise the Presiding Officer of one Authority to discharge also the functions of the Presiding Officer of another Authority.

53. Qualifications for appointment as Presiding Officer.-(1) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Presiding Officer of an Authority unless,-

(a) he is or has been a District Judge; or

(b) he is a qualified legal practitioner for not less than seven years.

(2) A Presiding Officer shall be appointed by the appropriate Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of a High Court in whose jurisdiction the Authority is proposed to be established.”

6. There is no dispute to the fact that the District Judge of the respective districts have been designated as the Authority under the Act of 2013. The provision of reference is given in Section 64 which is also extracted hereinbelow :

“64. Reference to Authority.-

(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 Authority, as the case may be, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the person to whom it is payable, the rights of Rehabilitation and Resettlement under Chapters V and VI or the apportionment of the compensatio