1. At the request of learned advocates for the parties, the present appeal is taken up for hearing.
2. ADMIT. Learned AGP Mr.P. P. Banaji waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondent No.2.
3. The present First Appeals have been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 r/w. Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 by the appellants challenging the impugned judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Cases No.246/1999 and 256/1999 dated 07.02.2011 by the Reference Court [learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Godhra, at Panchmahal] consolidated with the main Land Acquisition Reference Case No.246/1999 on the grounds mentioned in the memo of First Appeals inter alia it is specifically contended that after the award is declared by the Collector under the provisions of Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. It is contended that neither the copy of the award nor the notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act has been served upon the appellant and no compensation has been paid or even offered to the appellant. It is also contended that the amount of compensation was paid to some of the claimants on 26.05.1999 and they had filed References on 05.06.1999 and, therefore, the main contention is raised with regard to the service of the notice under Section 12(2) in compliance of the Land Acquisition Act. It is, therefore, contended that the mandatory provisions of the notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act and intimation of the award has not been fulfilled and, therefore, the same has been challenged. It is contended that the question of limitation would not arise since the notice as required under the law is not served upon the appellants.
4. Learned AGP Mr.P. P. Banaji for the respondent No.2 has, on instruction, placed on record the communication dated 13.02.2012 which has received from the Land Acquisition Officer along with the statement in tabular form which confirms that the notice as required under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act has not been served.
5. Having heard learned advocate Mr.Vijay N. Raval for the appellant and learned AGP Mr.P. P. Banaji for the respondent No.2 and without going further into other contentions and merits of the cases, it is desirable that the present appeals are required to be allowed only on this point remanding the matters back to the Reference Court [learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Godhra, at Panchmahal] for deciding fresh in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity to the parties to lead evidence on merits.
6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present appeals deserve to be allowed to the aforesaid extent and accordingly the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Cases No.246/1999 and 256/1999 dated 07.02.2011 by the Reference Court [learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Godhra, at Panchmahal] is hereby quashed and set aside. It goes without saying that the endavour shall be made, the Reference Court shall dispose of the references which has been remanded for being considered from the stage of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act preferably within a period of six months.
7. It goes without saying that since the notice as required under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act has not been served, the aspect of limitation will not have any bearing in light of the observation made by the Apex Court in the case of Parsottambhai Maganbhai Patel and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2005 SC 3464, has held that since the application for making a reference under Section 18 of the Act was filed beyond the period of six months from the date of declaration of the award; the same was barred by limitation. Direct service is permitted.
[ RAJESH H. SHUKLA, J. ] vijay