JUDGMENT :

The interpretational interplay of sub-sections 1 and 3 of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as the “LA Act” for short), has been invited to my attention in this case because the petitioner says that even if his application under section 28A(1) of the said Act is rejected, he obtains a right to make further application for reference to the competent Reference Court under Section 28A(3) thereof.

2. The petitioner is stated to be the owner of a property which has been acquired by the Government for the purpose of establishment of an “IT Park” and concedes that an Award was also issued in his favour. He says that, however, certain other land owners of the properties covered by the same acquisition notification, took up their Awards before the Sub-Court, Kozhikkod, in LAR 90/2013 and connected matters, which culminated in Ext.P4 order dated 21/10/2014, enhancing the compensation. He says that he, thereupon, preferred an application under Section 28A(1) of the “LA Act” on 20/10/2015, which is within the statutory time limit, but that no action was taken by the competent Authority on it for the next five years.

3. The petitioners says that, in