1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 583 OF 2012

Pundlik Aananda Dangde

age 52 years, occ. agri

r/o Wadgaon Sodu, Tq. Jamner

Dist. Jalgaon.

.. PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The Special Land Acquisition Officer

Upper Tapi Project,

Hatnur No. 1, Jalgaon

Dist. Jalgaon.

2.

The Executive Engineer

Minor Irrigation Works

Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.

.. RESPONDENTS

Mr. A.B. Kale, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for the State.

=====

CORAM : R.M. BORDE, J.

DATE : 6

th March, 2012.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1.

Heard.

2.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties,

petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

2

3.

Application tendered by petitioner seeking amendment to the

reference application has been turned down by the trial Court on the

ground that petitioner herein / claimant is trying to prolong the proceeding

and is trying to give go-by to the evidence available on record. It is also

recorded that such an amendment is not permissible for the reason that on

the basis of evidence the opponents have acquired substantial rights and as

such the application is not maintainable.

4.

It is to be noted that application seeking reference shall not contain

all the details. However, it would be sufficient if the claimant claims that he

has objection with the award as regards measurement of the acquired land

or as regards the compensation offered by the Collector or as regards the

person to whom it is payable or apportionment of compensation amongst

several claimants. It has been held by the Apex Court in the matter of

Ambya Kalya Mhatre and others Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2012(1)

Mh.L.J. 9 that a land owner can seek reference to the civil Court with

reference to any one or more of the four types of objections permissible

under section 18 of the Act. In paragraph no. 13 of the judgment the Apex

Court has observed thus :

3

.

Section 18 does not require a landowner objecting

to the amount of compensation, to make a claim for any

specific amount as compensation, nor does it require him

to state whether the increase in compensation is sought

only in regard to the land, or land and building, or land,

building and trees. A landowner can seek reference to

Civil Court, with reference to any one or more of the four

types of objections permissible under section 18 of the Act,

with reference to the award. His objection can either be

in regard to the measurement of the acquired land or in

regard to the compensation offered by the Collector or in

regard to persons to whom it is shown as payable or

apportionment of compensation among several

claimants. Once the landowner states that he has

objection to the amount of compensation, and seeks

reference to the Civil Court, the entire issue of

compensation is open before the Reference Court. Once

the claimant satisfies the Reference Court that the

compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is

inadequate, the Reference Court proceeds to determine

the compensation, with reference to the principles in

section 23 of the Act. As the Act does not require the

person aggrieved / landowner to specify the amount of

compensation sought, when objecting to the amount of

compensation and seeking a reference, mentioning of the

amount of compensation sought is optional. As there is no

obligation to specify the amount in the application for

reference, it can be specified in the claim statement filed

before the Reference Court.

.

In paragraph no. 16 of the judgment it is observed thus :

16.

A landowner, particularly a rural agriculturist, when

he loses the land may not know the exact value of his land

as on the date of the notification under section 4(1) of the

Act. When he seeks reference he may be dis