ORAL ORDER

1. By filing present petition under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution of India as well as under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.08.2022 passed by the Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition & Rehabilitation & Resettlement Authority, Rajkot Zone, Rajkot in Misc. Application No.4/2021 and the order dated 24.09.2019 passed by the I/c. Deputy Collector & Special Land Acquisition Officer (Narmada Yojna), Gandhidham and thereby prayed for direction upon the respondent no.2 to make Reference of the application submitted by the petitioner dated 06.03.2018 filed under Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.

2. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Anand Patel for the petitioner, learned AGP Ms. Himani Shah for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and learned advocate, Ms. Disha Karkar on behalf of learned advocate Ms. Aishvarya Gupta for the respondent no.3.

3. The facts of the case in nutshell are that the land bearing Survey No.289 admeasuring 14813 Sq.Mtrs. of Village Deshalpar, Taluka Mudra, District Kutch was proposed to be acquired by the respondents under the Narmada Yojna and accordingly, the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 06.05.2013 and, thereafter, a Notification under Section 6 was issued on 23.07.2013 and, thereafter after following due procedure of law, final award was declared by the Deputy Collector and Special Land Acquisition Officer on 02.07.2015 under Section 11(1) of the Land Acquisition Act.

4. Learned advocate, Mr. Patel submitted that the respondent authorities ought to have passed award under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act of 2013"), and the award is passed under the Old Act, which is contrary to the provisions of law. He submitted that subsequently, modified award came to be passed by the respondent no.2 on 21.11.2017, whereby Factor-2 was applied to the land in question, and the benefits under Sections 30(1), 30(2) and 30(3) of the Act of 2013, also came to be granted on the enhanced amount of compensation. He submitted that thereafter, the respondent no.2 issued notice to the petitioner, which was duly received by him on 03.03.2018 and in receipt thereof, the petitioner has filed a Reference Application under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 to the respondent no.2 on 16.03.2018, however, the said Reference Application came to be filed by the respondents on the ground that the modified award was passed on 21.11.2017, which was a supplementary award to the original award and the original award was dated 02.07.2015 and therefore, the Reference Application under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 was filed beyond the period of limitation and accordingly, by impugned order dated 24.09.2019, the Presiding Officer, Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority, Rajkot Zone, Rajkot has rejected the said application, against which, aforesaid writ petition has been preferred.

5. Learned advocate submitted that in a similar case, the Division Bench of this Court, in Special Civil Application No.12417 of 2023 and other allied matters vide order dated 02.01.2024 has set aside such similar impugned orders and remanded the applications under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 to the Deputy Collector and Special Land Acquisition Officer for referring the matter to the Competent Authority in accordance with the provisions of Section 64 of the Act of 2013.

6. Learned AGP Ms. Himani Shah has submitted that considering the above facts of the case, appropriate orders may be passed in the present case, since the time limit for preferring such an application under Section 64 of the Act of 2013 has been calculated from the date of the original award.

7. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, considered the submissions and perused the do