ORDER :

1. Petitioners have approached this Court for inaction on the part of Land Acquisition Collector in making the reference to the authorities i.e. Reference Court with respect to objections raised by petitioners/land owners with respect to determination of compensation by Land Acquisition Collector for acquisition of land/property of petitioners utilized for public purpose i.e. expansion of Wildlife Sanctuary Renukaji.

2. The process for acquisition was initiated by issuing notification dated 28.7.2010 under Section 18(1) of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 declaring the intention of Government to expand the area of the existing Renukaji Wildlife Sanctuary and for the said purpose, Deputy Commissioner, Sirmaur was authorized to perform the function of Collector as specified under Section 19 to 25(A) of Wildlife (Protection) Act. Consequent upon this, Deputy Commissioner, Sirmaur undertook the exercise as per law for acquisition of land. Section 25 of Wildlife (Protection) Act provides that under this Act, for the purpose of acquiring the land or right in or over such land, the Collector shall be deemed to be the Collector, proceeding under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Section 25(1)(d) further provides that where claimant does not accept the award made in his favour in the matter of compensation, he shall be deemed, within meaning of Section 18 of the Act, to be a person interested who has not accepted the award and shall be entitled to proceed to claim the relief against the award under the provisions of Part III of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

3. During pendency of aforesaid acquisition proceedings, Land Acquisition Act 1894, was replaced by the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to a New Act, 2013) w.e.f. 1.1.2014, repealing the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Section 24(1)(a) of new Act, 2013 provides that where no award under Section 11 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been made then all provisions of New Act 2013 relating to determination of compensation shall.

4. It is an admitted fact that before enactment of new Act 2013, no award under Section 11 of Land Acquisition Act had been passed by Land Acquisition Collector. Therefore, the award was to be passed under Section 23 of New Act, 2013. But Collector passed the award stating it to be an award under Section 11 of Land Acquisition Act.

5. Learned Deputy Advocate General has submitted that though Land Acquisition Collector has depicted that award has been passed under Section 11 of Land Acquisition Act 1894, however, perusal of award reflects that provisions of New Act 2013 have been taken into consideration for determining the compensation in this award and therefore, this award is to be deemed to have been passed under Section 23 of New Act, 2013. There is no force in submissions of learned Deputy

Advocate General.

6. Section 105 of the New Act, 2013 provides exemption to application of New Act, 2013 to certain cases and also application of this Act with certain modifications as specified in 4th Schedule, perusal whereof indicates that the acquisition under Wildlife (Protection) Act is not included in the category of those cases which have been exempted from application of New Act 2013 or application of New Act 2013 with certain modifications. In view of factual position and provisions of New Act 2013, it is concluded that award, stated to have been passed under Section 11 of Land Acquisition Act 1894, is to be considered an award passed under Section 23 of New Act, 2013.

7. Any person interested, who has not accepted the award, has been provided a remedy under Section 64 of New Act, 2013 whereby an applicant/interested person can seek enhancement in compensation by making a written application to Collector to refer the matter for determination of authority. In present case, petitioners have submitted written objections to the Collector but he has not referred the same to