IMPORTANT POINT
" The period of limitation Sec. 28A(1) application as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is 3 months. The application for restoration application has been filed well before the expiry of the period of limitation of 3 months as envisaged in para 10 of the judgment of this Court in Thankappan`s case.
" The original application will get revived for all purposes of limitation, then the period of limitation has to be computed on the basis of the copy so obtained on that application with reference to the date of that application-The date of copy application should be reckoned as the original date of submission of such application, viz., 6.10.2008.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Ext.P-3 order dated 26.3.2009, whereby her Ext.P-2 application dated February, 2009 filed under Sec. 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, has been rejected on the ground that the same is barred by limitation.

2. The prayers in this Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

“(i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the respondents 2 and 4 to restore Ext.P-2 application and consider it on merit.

(ii) To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions to call for the entire records leading upto Ext.P-3 and quash same and declare the same is illegal and unsustainable.

(iii) To issue any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Heard Smt. Hemalatha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondents.

4. Seeking better compensatory benefits on the basis of an award passed by the Land Acquisition Reference Court (LAR Court) concerned in respect of third parties, but pertaining to very same notification on the basis of which the petitioner's land has been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the petitioner had filed Ext.P-2 application dated Feb. 2009 under Sec. 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking reference as per that provision to the LAR Court, for determination of claim for enhanced compensation as envisaged in that provision. The claim was made by the petitioner as per Ext.P-2 application under Sec. 28A(1) on the basis of Ext.P-1 award dated 30.9.2008, rendered by the LAR Court concerned (Addl. Sub Court, Kollam) in LAR No.12/1996 and 152/196, which according to the petitioner, pertain to the very same notification as the one involved in the acquisition of the petitioner's land as well. A perusal of Ext.P-1 copy of the judgment would reveal that the judgment in question was rendered on 30.9.2008 and the application for grant of certified copy of the same was made by the petitioner as application No.2656 on 6.10.2008. It is further endorsed thereon that since the stamp was not duly produced by the petitioner, the application was rejected. Later the petitioner filed an application for restoration and the same was restored on 21.1.2009. Thereafter, certified copy of the ready on 7.2.2009 and it was notified that the petitioner should appear to receive the certified copy on 11.2.2009 and that the copy was actually delivered to the petitioner on 11.2.2009. The 2nd respondent Land Acquisition Officer has taken the view in the impugned Ext.P-3 order dated 26.3.2009 that since the application for grant of certified copy was though initially filed on 6.10.2008, the same was rejected due to non production of stamp (for not curing the defect) and though application for restoration was filed, the same was restored only on 21.1.2009 and that therefore the application for grant of certified copy made by the petitioner should be deemed to have been made only on 21.1.2009 (date of restoration) for the purpose of computing the period of limitation and since that is the position, Ext.P-2 application is filed only on 12.3.2009, which is obviously barred by limitation. It is not in dispute that the date of filing of the application for grant of certified copy is reckoned as 21.1.2009 (date of restoration of the application and not as 6.10.2008, date of original submission of the application) then certainly Ext.P-2 application dated 12.3.2009 is obviously barred by limitation as the requisite period of 3 months thereof has thus expired.

5. Sec. 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 provides as follows:

“Sec.28A: Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court. (1) Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Col