The limitation period for filing a reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act begins when the landowner has actual knowledge of the award's contents, not merely from the award's passing date.

Judgment

Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.

By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to an award dated 29.01.2018 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Kurukshetra (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Reference Court’), whereby the reference petition invoked under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the 1894 Act’) at the instance of appellants/landowners was dismissed being time barred.

2. Briefly stating, land owned by the appellants, situated within revenue estate of village Chhapra, Tehsil Shahabad, District Kurukshetra was sought to be acquired vide notification dated 27.03.2012 issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, followed by notification dated 27.03.2013, issued under Section 6 thereof.

3. The award dated 04.07.2013 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 11 of the 1894 Act, whereby the market value of the acquired land was determined @ 28 lakhs per acre, besides grant of other statutory benefits.

4. Aggrieved against the aforesaid award dated 04.07.2013, the appellants/landowners invoked Section 24 along with Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 read with Section 18 of the 1894 Act. The reference petition was filed on 24.03.2014 along with an application seeking condonation of delay in filing thereof.

5. No specific reply to the application seeking condonation of delay was filed on behalf of the respondent/Land Acquisition Collector. In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, no specific averment was made as regards issuance of notice under Section 12(2) of the 1894 Act upon the appellants/landowners informing them about passing of the award besides conveying them the contents thereof.

6. The Reference Court vide award dated 29.01.2018 dismissed the reference petition while holding the same to be barred by limitation observing that the award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act was passed on 04.07.2013, whereas the reference petition was filed on 24.03.2014, thereby the same was filed after expiry of limitation period prescribed under Section 18 of the 1894 Act.

7. No one has appeared for the appellants, while on the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that notice dated 14.06.2013 was served upon the appellants/landowners in consonance with Section 9 of the 1894 Act, wherein the tentative date of passing of award was mentioned and thus the appellants/landowners were having due notice/knowledge of passing of the award. He further contends that even in application for condonation of delay, no averment has been made that the landowners did not receive any notice under Section 12(2) of the 1894 Act. Learned State counsel also relies upon the following para from the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Bhagwan Das & Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors.”, reported in AIR 2010 Supreme Court 1532:-

“13. When a person interested makes an application for reference seeking the benefit of six months period from the date of knowledge, the initial onus is on him to prove that he (or his representative) was not present when the award was made, that he did not receive any notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, and that he did not have the knowledge of the contents of the award during a period of six months prior to the filing the application for reference. This onus is discharged by asserting these facts on oath. He is not expected to prove the negative. Once the initial onus is discharged by the claimant/person interested, it is for the Land Acquisition Collector to establish that the person interested was present either in person or through his representative when the award was made, or that he had received a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, or that he had knowledge of the contents of the award. Actual or constructive knowledge of the contents of the award can be established by the Collector by proving that the person interested had received or drawn the compensation amount for t