Knowledge of award impacts the limitation period for seeking reference under land acquisition, and the highest sale exemplar must be prioritized for compensation valuation.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Jain, J.

1. The instant appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) has been preferred by the landowner against impugned judgment and order dated 22.01.1993 passed by Third Additional District Judge, Aligarh rejecting the Land Acquisition Reference No. 11 of 1990, Sukhram Singh versus State of UP, by holding that the Collector/Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has awarded the correct amount of compensation and also, that the reference is time barred.

2. Facts in brief are, that for constructing, Amarpur canal(rajvaha) from kilometre 26–009 to 35–706, for transmitting the waters of Central Ganges canal, land acquisition proceedings were initiated for acquiring 8.62 acre land, situated in village Jirauli Dor,Tehsil and Pargana Kol, District Aligarh, on behalf of the Executive Engineer, Madhya Ganga canal, Construction Division– Second, District Aligarh. A notification under section 4(1) of the Act was published on 22.10.1979, which was published in the Gazette on 8.3.1980, and subsequently, a declaration under section 6 of the Act was made on 7.2.1980, which was published in the Gazette on 22.3.1980. After inviting the objections of the affected landowners, the Collector passed the award No. 426/1980-81 on 11.12.1980. A declaration under section 12(2) of the Act, was also made on 11.12.1980. The possession of the appellants land was taken on 16.1.1981.

3. Besides others, the appellant Sukh Ram's land belonging to khata number 186, Chuck No. 329, having area of one beegha, three Biswa, 17 biswansi(0.68 acres) situated in village Jirauli Dor,was acquired for the above purpose. The appellant was held entitled to receive compensation at the rate of rupees 479.15 per acre ,for his 0.68 acre land, amounting to rupees 325.82, besides this, he was also awarded solatium at the rate of 15% amounting to 48.87, in total, the appellant was awarded compensation of 374.69, under section 11 of the Act.

4. The Collector determined compensation on the basis of sale deed(exemplar) dated 20.7.1979, pertaining to an area of 2.413 acre. The Collector considered five sale deeds pertaining to the same village, but he rejected the other four exemplars on the ground that they were of lands, which were situated far away from habitation and acquired land and also were of the period, which was not proximate to the notification under section 4(1) of the Act. The compensation was determined on the basis of exemplar dated 20.7.1979 by concluding that the land pertaining in this exemplar, is very close to habitation, which is relatively distant to the acquired land. It was further held that, this land is similar to the acquired land, regarding facilities available for irrigating the land and its suitability for agriculture.

5. The appellant moved an application on 3.3.1989 before the Collector to refer the matter for enhancement of compensation under section 18 of the Act, to the reference court on the ground that he had no information prior to February, 1989 about the acquisition, since he never received any notice from the Collector, never received the copy of the award, never received the compensation, as such, he had no knowledge about the acquisition proceedings, as such, he cou