HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
, J
Jamita Ram and Others v. Collector of Kangra
1. "Whether a Court to whom a reference under S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act has been made can go behind the reference and decide whether the application has been made beyond the period of limitation?" is the question which arises for decision in these revisions. The Supreme Court in Mahammed Hasnuddin v. State of Maharashtra , AIR 1979 SC 404 , has ruled that the Court has the right nay a duty, of satisfying itself that the reference is valid and proper reference. However, Mr. Shamsher Singh Kanwar, learned counsel for the petitioners, contends that this judgment is not applicable in this State because of addition of sub-section (3) in S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act). Before I analyse the law I may briefly refer to the facts of one case since similar facts are involved in other cases.
2. In Civil Revision No.127 of 1981 the petitioner is Jamita Ram. His land was acquired for the construction of Beas Dam at Pong by an award dated 31st January, 1972. The Collector announced the rates of compensation in respect of various categories of lands. The petitioner was present when the Collector announced the award. Since he was not satisfied with this award he made an applicati
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.