(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI) 1. Rule. Mr. Rakesh Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of rule on behalf of respondents. With the consent of parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal today itself.
2. We have heard Mr. Amit Nanavati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Rakesh Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents.
3. The facts of the case are that the petitioners are owners of land situated in village Chhamichha, Taluka Chansma, District Patan. The Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) was issued on 29.2.1996. Thereafter, Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 31.7.1996. The award was pronounced on 17.9.1998. Certain other persons challenged the award by way of a Reference under Section 18 of the Act. However, the petitioners had not filed any reference application under Section 18 of the Act. The reference of other persons was registered as Old Land Acquisition Reference No.385 of 1999 to 401 of 1999 and thereafter, it was allotted new Number as LAR No.512 to 528 of 2006. The Reference was decided on 30.7.2011 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Patan and additional compensation was awarded. Upon coming to know about the judgment given in Reference on 30.7.2011, the petitioners on 1.11.2011 filed an applications under Section 28-A of the Act for grant of compensation. The applications of the petitioners were dismissed by order dated 17.2.2012 on the ground that the Reference application has been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation.
4. According to the respondents, there was delay of one day in filing the reference applications under Section 28-A.
However, according to learned counsel for the petitioners, the reference applications were filed within time. The petitioners had applied for certified copy of the award on 9.9.2011 and the same was ready for delivery on 16.9.2011 and was received by the petitioners on 30.9.2011. The application under Section 28-A is required to be filed within a period of three months. If we exclude the time when the certified copy was applied till the time it was made ready for delivery, that will be the period of 7 days and 30th October and 31st October, 2011 being public holidays, therefore, the applications under Section 28-A of the Act were filed on 1.11.2011.
5. Therefore, in our opinion, there was no delay in filing the applications under Section 28-A by the petitioners and it was within the period of three months as prescribed by law. Therefore, the order dated 17.2.2012 passed by the respondent No.2 was illegal and cannot be maintained.
6. In the result, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 17.2.2012 passed by the respondent No.2 (Annexure H to the writ petition) is quashed. The respondent No.2 is directed to decide the applications of the petitioners filed under Section 28-A treating it to be within time and decide it on merits in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute. Parties shall bear their own costs.
Sd/-
(V.M.SAHAI, J.) Sd/-
(S.G.SHAH, J.) Savariya