The District Court cannot question the validity of a reference made by the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act once jurisdiction is established.

1. In a Land Acquisition Case a reference was made by the Collector to the District Court at Bhuj. The learned District Judge rejected the reference holding that it was barred by time and that that was not a valid reference. He, therefore, refused to hear the reference and hence this revision application. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that once a reference is made by a Collector under S. 19 of the Land Acquisition Act to the District Court, the District Court has no jurisdiction to decide whether the reference is within limitation or whether the reference was in conformity with the provisions of S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act .

2. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the applicant relies on Hari Krishan v. State of Pepsu , AIR 1958 Punj 490, Venkateswaraswami v. Sub-Collector, Bezwada, AIR 1943 Mad. 327, Secretary of State v. Bhagwan Prasad, ILR (52) All. 96 : AIR 1929 All 769, and Secretary of State v. Bhagwan Prasad, AIR 1932 All. 597. But the learned counsel for the opponent disputes this proposition and relied on Mahadeo Krishna v. Mamlatdar of Alibag , ILR 1944 Bom. 90 : (AIR 1944 Bom. 200) G. J. Desai v. Abdul Mazid Kadri, 53 Bom. LR 257 : (AIR 1951 Bom. 156) and in the matter of Government and Name Kothare, ILR 30 Bom. 275 (FB). To decide this point, it is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Land Acquisition Act .
S.18 reads as follows :
"Reference to Court : - (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.
(2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken :
Provided that every such application shall be made : -
(a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award;
(b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt or the notice from the Collector under S. 12, sub-S. (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire."
S.19 of the Act reads as follows :
"Collector's statement to the Court. - (1) In making the reference, the Collector shall state for the information of the Court, in writing under his hand -
(a) the situation and extent of the land, with p? culars of any trees, buildings or standing crops thereon;
(b) the names of the persons who he has reason to think are interested in such land;
(c) the amount awarded for damages and paid or tendered under S.5 and S.17, or either of them, and the amount of compensation awarded under S. 11; and
(d) if the objection be to the amount of the compensation, the grounds on which the amount of compensation was determined.
(2) To the said statement shall be attached a Schedule giving the particulars of the notices served upon, and of the statements in writing made, or delivered by, the parties interested respectively."
S.20 of the Act reads as follows :
"Service of notice. - The Court shall thereupon cause a notice specifying the day on which the Court will proceed to determine the objection, and directing their appearance before the Court on that day, to be served on the following persons, namely -
(a) the applicant;
(b) all persons interested in the objection, except such (if any) o