Section 28-A land acquisition redetermination is limited to non-reference claimants, with time running from the civil court award.

Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act was construed as a limited beneficial remedy for landowners covered by the same notification who did not seek a Section 18 reference and whose compensation is adversely affected by a comparable civil court award under Section 26. The three-month limitation runs from the Section 26 award, after excluding the day of pronouncement and time needed for a copy, and later appellate decisions do not create a fresh cause of action. The provision is prospective and does not reopen earlier awards made before commencement of the Amendment Act. The beneficiary or the State may participate in the inquiry, but has no right to seek a reference under Section 28-A(3).

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a landholder who did not seek a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, or who received compensation without protest, is a person aggrieved entitled to seek redetermination under Section 28-A; (ii) whether the limitation of three months under Section 28-A runs from the award of the civil court under Section 26 and whether successive appellate awards furnish fresh causes of action; (iii) whether Section 28-A applies prospectively only and whether the beneficiary or the State can seek a reference under Section 28-A(3).

Issue (i): whether a landholder who did not seek a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, or who received compensation without protest, is a person aggrieved entitled to seek redetermination under Section 28-A.

Analysis: Section 28-A was enacted to remove the inequality caused by the earlier scheme, under which poorer and less informed landowners often failed to pursue a reference under Section 18 while other owners under the same notification obtained higher compensation. The expression "person aggrieved" was construed in that setting to mean a person whose pecuniary interest is adversely affected because a comparable landowner has obtained higher compensation from the civil court. The benefit is therefore confined to persons interested in lands covered by the same notification who had not availed the remedy under Section 18.

Conclusion: Such a non-protester or non-applicant under Section 18 is a person aggrieved within Section 28-A, but a claimant who already pursued the reference and failed is not entitled to invoke that provision.

Issue (ii): whether the limitation of three months under Section 28-A runs from the award of the civil court under Section 26 and whether successive appellate awards furnish fresh causes of action.

Analysis: The award contemplated by Section 28-A is the award of the civil court under Part III, namely the award under Section 26, and not the appellate judgment of the High Court or the Supreme Court. The statutory period of three months begins from the date of that award, subject to exclusion of the day of pronouncement and the time required to obtain a copy. Once that period expires, later awards or appellate decisions do not revive the time or create a fresh cause of action. The Collector should also keep the matter pending until the appellate proceedings against the foundational award are finally concluded, so that redetermination is based on the final award.

Conclusion: Limitation under Section 28-A runs from the civil court's award under Section 26, and successive appellate decisions do not give a fresh limitation or a fresh cause of action.

Issue (iii): whether Section 28-A applies prospectively only and whether the beneficiary or the State can seek a reference under Section 28-A(3).

Analysis: Section 28-A was held to be prospective and not retrospective; it does not reopen an award under Section 11 if the award under Section 26 was made before the commencement of the Amendment Act. The provision is designed to benefit those who failed to seek a reference under Section 18 and does not extend to persons who already invoked that remedy and lost, or to the beneficiary or the State. The beneficiary is entitled to participate in the inquiry under Section 28-A(2), but does not acquire a right to seek reference under Section 28-A(3), though judicial review remains available.

Conclusion: Section 28-A is prospective and does not apply to pre-commencement awards in the manner contended; the beneficiary or the State has no right to seek a reference under Section 28-A(3).

Final Conclusion: The provision was interpreted as a limited beneficial remedy to secure parity in compensation for eligible landowners who had not pursued the earlier reference remedy, while excluding unsuccessful reference claimants and the beneficiary from the statutory redetermination route.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 28-A grants a prospective, limited right of redetermination only to persons interested in land covered by the same notification who did not avail Section 18 and whose compensation is adversely affected by a comparable award under Section 26; the right must be invoked within three months from that award, and it does not extend to appellate judgments or to parties who already pursued the reference remedy.

---