The period between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021 be excluded from the computation of limitation, on account of the incapacitation of the citizens of this Nation from invoking any remedy on account of the pandemic scenario.

Headnote:
LIMITATION - RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013 - SECTION 64(2)(b) - DELAY IN FILING REFERENCE APPLICATION - CONDONATION OF DELAY - COVID-19 PANDEMIC - EXCLUSION OF PERIOD FROM COMPUTATION OF LIMITATION -
Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed applications for reference of the Awards in their favour to the competent Civil Court, with respect to the properties acquired from them, solely for the reason that the said applications have been filed beyond time.
Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the applications were filed beyond the one year period, but the intervening Covid – 19 scenario brings a new colour to it. This is because, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered that the period between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021 be excluded from the computation of limitation, on account of the incapacitation of the citizens of this Nation from invoking any remedy on account of the pandemic scenario.
Issues: Whether the applications for reference made by the petitioners could be construed to be within time or beyond it.
Ratio Decidendi: The proviso to Section 64(2)(b) of the Act vests the competent Authority with the jurisdiction to condone the delay of one year, provided the petitioners plead necessary cause for the same.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the impugned orders; with a consequential direction to the Tahsildar to reconsider the applications, adverting to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.M.No.3/2021.

JUDGMENT

[WP(C) Nos.29190/2021 & 29222/2021]

I am considering these two writ petitions together since the factual circumstances pleaded and the legal issues are similar, if not identical.

2. In both these cases, the petitioners impugn the orders of the second respondent - Special Tahsildar, operating under the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 'the Act'), rejecting their request for reference of the Awards in their favour to the competent Civil Court, with respect to the properties acquired from them, solely for the reason that the said applications have been filed beyond time.

3. Sri.Raphel Thekkan, learned counsel for the petitioners, explained that even though it might look as if his clients' applications are beyond time, the fact remains that if the block of days between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021, ordered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to be excluded from the purview of limitation, is taken away, then their applications are well within time or at least within the umbra of the proviso to Section 64(2)(b) of the Act. He argued that since this has not been considered by the Special Tahsildar and since the District Collectors, thereafter, granted approval to the same without making any cogent enquiry, the orders impugned in these cases are liable to be set aside and the Tahsildar must be directed to reconsider the applications in terms of law.

4. In response, learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.Mable C.Kurian, submitted that, going by the Scheme of the Act, the competent Authority - who is the Special Tahsildar, can condone delay of only one year as per the proviso to Section 64(2)(b) thereof. She contended that, in these cases, the applications have been made even beyond that period and therefore, that the Special Tahsildar was justified in having issued Ext.P3 in W.P.(C) No.29190/2021 and Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.29222/2021. She further pointed out that, since the petitioners thereafter approached the District Collector against these orders, the said Authority had no other option but to issue Ext.P2 in W.P.(C) No.29190/2021 and Ext.P4 in W.P.(C) No.29222/2021, since he had no competence to consider the same. She, therefore, prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

5. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is clear that the only legal issue involved in these cases is whether the applications for reference made by the petitioners could be construed to be within time or beyond it. Going by the proviso to Section 64(2)(b) of the Act, the competent Authority is vested with the jurisdiction to condone the delay of one year, provided the petitioners plead necessary cause for the same.

6. In the facts of these cases, certainly the applications were filed beyond this one year period, but the intervening Covid – 19 scenario brings a new colour to it. This is because, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as rightly stated by Sri.Raphel Thekkan, has ordered that the period between 15.03.2020 to 02.10.2021 be excluded from the computation of limitation, on account of the incapacitation of the citizens of this Nation from invoking any remedy on account of the pandemic scenario. However, this has not been considered by the Tahsildar or by the District Collector, while the impugned orders have been issued.

7. I am, therefore, of the firm view that the matter will have to be reconsidered by the Tahsildar, for which purpose, the impugned orders will require to be set aside.

Resultantly, I allow these writ petitions and set aside Exts.P2 and P3 in W.P.(C) No.29190/2021 and Exts.P2 and P4 in W.P.(C) No.29222/2021; with a consequential direction to the Tahsildar to reconsider Exts.P1 in W.P.(C) No.29190/2021 and Ext.P3 in W.P.(C) No.29222/2021, adverting to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.M.No.3/2021, a copy of which shall be produced before him by the petitioners, along with a certified copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall produce the sam

Click Here to Read the rest of this document