A land owned by the petitioner has been acquired for a public purpose. Since the petitioner could not seek a reference for enhanced compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as `the Act' for short), he filed Ext.P1 application for re-determination of compensation when the reference court has granted enhanced compensation to a similar property covered by the same notification. Ext.P1 application has been rejected by the second respondent by Ext.P2 order. The petitioner, thereupon, preferred an application for reference under Section 28A(3) of the Act. The said application now stands rejected by the second respondent on the ground that the application was not preferred in Form No.22A of the Land Acquisition Rules. Ext.P6 is the W.P.(C) No. 24316 of 2016 -2- order issued by the second respondent in this connection. Ext.P6 is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. In Aboobacker v. District Collector [2011 (3) KLT 822], this Court has held that the application for reference under Section 28A(3) of the Act need not be in Form No.22A of the Land Acquisition Rules.
3. In the light of the said judgment, Ext.P6 order is set aside and the third respondent, who is presently exercising of the powers of the Land Acquisition Officer, is directed to make the reference sought by the petitioner to the civil court. This shall be done within six weeks from today.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE bpr