Land acquisition additional amount under Section 23(1-A) applies where the Reference Court award followed the amendment.

Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was treated as conferring a substantive right operating prospectively, and the expression "award" was read as referring to the award made by the Collector or the Reference Court, depending on context. The benefit under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 was not denied merely because the Collector had earlier made an award; where the Reference Court's award was made after the amendment came into force, the claimant remained entitled to the additional amount. The earlier contrary view was not accepted to that extent, and the Union's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the claimant was entitled to the additional amount under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where the Collector's award had been made before 30 April 1982 but the Reference Court's award was made after the amendment came into force.

Analysis: Section 23(1-A) confers a substantive right and, in the absence of contrary language, operates prospectively. The expression "award" in that provision refers to the award made by the Collector or the Reference Court, as the case may be, and does not justify substituting the Collector for the Court. Section 30(1)(a) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 extends the benefit to proceedings pending on 30 April 1982 where no Collector's award had been made by that date. The provision cannot be read so narrowly as to deny the benefit merely because the Collector had earlier made an award, when the Reference Court itself made its award after the amendment came into force. The contrary view taken in the earlier decision was not accepted as correct to that extent.

Conclusion: The claimant was entitled to the benefit of Section 23(1-A), and the challenge by the Union of India failed.

---