SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(All) 89

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : DILIP GUPTA AND SIDDHARTHA VARMA, JJ.
Smt. KAMLA TOMAR ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 611 of 2017, decided on 23rd January, 2017)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Rakesh Kumar Srivastava for the Petitioner; C.S.C. for the Respondents.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Section 28-A—Limitation—Condonation of Delay—Limitation would commence from date of award—Application filed beyond three months from date of award of Reference Court barred by limitation. [Para 16]

       Result; Petition Dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—The issue that arises for consideration in this petition is whether the delay in filing an application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (the Act) can be condoned.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the delay can be condoned and, therefore, the application that had been filed beyond the time prescribed under Section 28-A of the Act was required to be decided on merits after condoning the delay.

3. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has submitted that the time period provided for under Section 28-A of the Act for filing the application cannot be extended and, therefore, the application filed by the petitioner which was admittedly beyond the time prescribed cannot be entertained.

4. We have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

5. It is alleged that land admeasuring 78 acres situated in Village-Arthala, District Ghaziabad, including the land belonging to the husband of the petitioner, was acquired in 1960 by the State Government. The award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 11 of the Act on 28 September 1977 by adopting the belting system. The market rate of the land falling in the first belt was determined at Rs. 2.08/- per square yard, while that of the land falling in the second belt was determined at Rs. 1.04/- per square yard. Some of the tenure-holders covered by the same notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act filed an application under Section 18 of the Act and the Reference Court by award dated 31 March 1987 enhanced the compensation by determining the market rate of the land to be Rs. 8.50 per square yard. The First Appeal filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh was allowed in part on 14 October 2003 and the market rate of the land was determined at Rs. 6.80/- per square yard.

6. It is on 14 May 2012 that the petitioner filed an application before the Collector, Ghaziabad under Section 28-A of the Act claiming that the petitioner should also be awarded Rs. 6.80 per square yard as the market rate of the land. This petition has been filed for a direction upon the Collector to decide the application filed by the petitioner under Section 28-A of the Act.

7. Section 28-A of the Act requires that the application should be filed within three months from the date of the award of the Court. It is reproduced :

“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 Collector under Section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court:

Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this sub-section, the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded.

(2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub-section (1), conduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and make an award determining the amount of compensation payable to the applicants.

(3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub-section (2) may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court and the provisions of Sections 18 to 28 shall, so far as may be, apply to such reference as they apply to

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top