Delay of four days in a compensation application does not impede substantive rights under land acquisition law.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner filed an application under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, 2013 Act) seeking a reference, with a petition to condone the delay of four days. The delay was not condoned. The petition was dismissed. Consequently, the reference is also refused. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that going by (2) of the Act, a delay upto a period of one year, can be condoned. The same has not been considered. The learned Counsel would also hasten to add that no reason, whatsoever, has been stated for not condoning the delay. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds that the impugned Ext.P1 Order cannot be sustained. A delay of four days cannot stand in the way of the petitioner’s substantive right in terms of of the 2013 Act, for a reference, especially, when he is deprived of his valuable property on account of the acquisition. This is all the more so when (2) contemplates condonation of delay for a period upto one year.

3. In the circumstances, Ext.P1 will stand set aside. There will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to reconsider the petitioner’s application for condonation of delay afresh, in accordance with law and based on the observations contained in this judgment. Once the delay is condoned, the reference should proceed in accordance with law.

This WP(C) is disposed of as above.