TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (10) TMI 304
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., in his award and decree dated May 25, 1985 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 25,000/- per bigha with enhanced statutory benefits under Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984 (for short "Amendment Act). The State carried the matter in Appeal No. 306/85 to the High Court which is pending disposal. On August 5, 1985, the appellants moved the Special Land Acquisition Officer under Section 28-A to re-determine and award compensation at par with Krishna Kumar. They also simultaneously moved the High Court under Article 226 to direct the Special L.A.O. to decide their applications under Section 28-A. The High. Court by its order dated January 28, 1987, when directed Special L.A.0 to do the same, the latter rejected their applications on two grounds, namely, the appellants are not aggrieved persons and that the decree and award made in favour of Krishna Kumar was pending-appeal in the High Court. They again challenged it in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7276/87 and by the impugned judgment dated October 24,1991, the Division Bench dismissed the writ petition holding that the appellants are not aggrieved persons within the meaning of Section 28-A read with Section 11, 18 & 31 of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hanced the compensation to Rs. 59,290/- per acre with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the application. Therefore, the appellant filed an application under Section 28-A(3) seeking reference and by his proceedings dated 5.2.91, the Collector rejected the request for reference under Section 18. The appellant carried in revision to the High Court in C.R. No. 2313/91 and the High Court Punjab and Haryana by its order dated 17.7.91 summarily dismissed the petition. 5. On April 27, 1994, this Court, while noticing divergence of opinion expressed by different High Courts on the scope of Section 28-A, issued notice to all the State Governments and the Central Government, since the decision will have effect on all the Governments and directed them to appear and file their written arguments. Notice was also issued to the learned Solicitor-General to assist the Court. Though notices were served accordingly on all the State Governments and the Central Government, only the Central Government and some of the State Governments have entered appearance through their counsel. However, none has filed written arguments till date despite opportunity afforded therefore. 6. It is' co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er enhanced under Section 26 or by the High Court under Section 54 or by this Court. It was also contended that the person aggrieved under Section 28-A, must be one who has an interest in the land which is sine qua non to claim for higher compensation. Even one who was handicapped due to illiteracy, ignorance or poverty had to receive the compensation only under protest. Only that class of persons who would have received the compensation under protest could be aggrieved persons to avail of the right to claim redetermination of compensation. Section 28A is transitional one and does not apply to future awards. The Collector when re-determined the compensation under Section 28A(2), the beneficiary being person interested not having accepted the award, such person becomes entitled to seek reference under Section 28-A(3). 7. Shri Harish Salve, the learned senior counsel, who argued for the claimants, contended that when compensation was enhanced by court, be it court of original or appellate jurisdiction, for the land in the neighbourhood of the claimant acquired under the same Notification, such claimant also becomes entitled to receive higher compensation to his land by making an app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the remedy of reference to higher forums. Sections 28-A(2) and (3) throw sufficient light in the interpretation of Section 28-A(1), 11, 18 and 31. Payment of equal compensation to all the people having interest in the lands acquired under the same Notification is the quintessence and running thread to avail of the right and the remedy provided for under Section 28-A for redetermination of the compensation by the aggrieved persons. It was also contended that the finality of the disposal of the reference under Sections 18 and 54 or Article 136 crystalises the quantum of compensation payable to the lands under acquisition and that should not only furnish the remedy to lay claim but also starting point to compute the limitation. This beneficial interpretation would subserve the purpose of Section 28-A. A harmonious interpretation to advance the object of Section 28-A should be adopted to achieve the legislative animation of according parity in payment of compensation to all claimants who have an interest in the lands under the acquisition. Restricted interpretation canvassed for the State frustrates the object of the right and remedy given by Section 28-A of the Act. Section 28-A is no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en the application has been made within 6 weeks from the date of the Collector's award by the interested person present or represented before the Collector when the award was made and, in other cases, within 6 weeks from the date of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 or within 6 weeks from the date of the Collector's award whichever period shall first expire. Under Section 16, unless possession of the acquired land was taken under Section 17, the Collector shall take its possession and such land thereafter vests in the State absolutely free from all encumbrances. 9. The person receiving compensation under protest because of the first proviso to Section 31(2), gets right under Section 18(1) to make an application in writing to the Collector requiring him to refer the matter to the Court for determination of his claim for compensation and the Collector/L.A.O. in such an event, is enjoined to refer the matter with the required particulars. Court has been defined in Section 3(d) to mean principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction unless the appropriate Government has appointed, a special Judicial Officer within specified local l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ard, therefore, was considered as a tender or offer made by the Collector on behalf of the Government to the owner of the property for acceptance. Although the Government is bound by the proceedings of the Collector, the persons interested are not concluded by the findings in the award. Therefore, he makes the offer binding on the Government as well as on the owner of the property. Communication of the award is required to be done if he is not present at the time of the making of the award or none represented them. Service of notice of award is made mandatory. Therefore, this Court held that "the date of the award cannot be determined solely by reference to the time when the award is signed by the Collector or delivered by him in his office; it must involve the consideration of the question as to when it was known to the party concerned either actually or constructively. The date of the award should be construed in that perspective. The knowledge of the party affected by the decision of the Collector, either actual or constructive, is an essential element which must be satisfied before the decision can be brought into force. The communication of the award to the party concerned, ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aken advantage by poor and inarticulate and is usually exercised only by the comparatively affluent land owners and that this causes considerable inequality in the payment of compensation for the same or similar quality of land to different interested persons, it was proposed to provide an opportunity to all aggrieved parties whose land is covered under the same Notification to seek redetermination of compensation, once any one of them has obtained orders of payment of higher compensation from the reference court under Section 18 of the Act." In para 3 of the Financial Memorandum, it is stated thus:- "Clause (19) of the Bill seeks to commensurate a new Section 28A of the Act which provides that if a party in a land acquisition proceeding obtains the orders of the court under Section 18 of the Act for higher compensation, another person whose lands are covered under the same Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and who may have reasons to be similarly aggrieved by the award of the Collector, may file to the Collector for redetermination of their amount of compensation payable to them on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court. 12. The Statement of Objects....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under Section 4, Sub- section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be redetermined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court: Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this sub-section, the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. (2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under Sub-section (1), conduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard and make an award determining the amount of compensation payable to the applicants. (3) Any person who ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and remedy has been provided to make a written application within the prescribed period. The non-obstante clause lifts the rigour of the bar created by Section 18(1) and the second proviso to Section 31 and makes him eligible to be at par with his neighbour to claim parity for compensation to the land similarly situated as the land covered by the court award. 16. The first question that arises for determination is, who is a person "aggrieved" within the meaning of Section 28-A(1) of the Act. Para 2(IX) of the Statement of the Objects and Reasons read with para 3 of the Financial Memorandum would indicate that Section 28-A was introduced for the first time in the second Bill to benefit poor and inarticulate people who by reason of their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy fail to take advantage of their right of reference to the Civil Court under Section 18. By operation of second proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 31 and Section 18(1), though such people are interested persons, if due to their ignorance, illiteracy or indigence, receive compensation for their lands without protest, would be denied of their right to obtain higher compensation while the comparatively affluent land ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... deprived or denied of something, which he would be interested to obtain in the usual course or similar benefits or advantage or results in wrongful affectation of his title to compensation. 18. In Collins English Dictionary, the word "aggrieved" has been defined to mean "to ensure unjustly especially by infringing a person's legal rights". In Webster Comprehensive Dictionary, International Edition at page 28, aggrieved person is defined to mean "subjected to ill-treatment, feeling an injury or injustice. Injured, as by legal decision adversely infringing upon one's rights". In Strouds Judicial Dictionary, Fifth Ed., Vol. 1, pages 83-84, person aggrieved means "person injured or damaged in a legal sense". In Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. at page 65, aggrieved has been defined to mean "having suffered loss or injury; damnified; injured", aggrieved person has been defined to mean "One whose legal right is invaded by an act complained of, or whose pecuniary interest is directly and adversely affected by a decree or judgment. One whose right of property may be established or divested. The word "aggrieved" refers to a substantial grievance, a denial of some personal, pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ee months begins to run under Section 28-A and whether successive awards made by Civil Court at different times in respect of the land covered by the same Notification furnish separate causes of action for making applications under Section 28A. Let us consider the meaning of the words "an award under this part" referred to in Section 28-A(1) which is Part III of the Act. The heading to that part begins by reference to court and its procedure. The "court" means a principal civil court of original jurisdiction or a special judicial officer appointed to perform the functions of the court under the Act as becomes clear as is noticed already. What are the matters to be considered in determining the compensation on a reference made to it under Section 18, is detailed in Section 23 while matters to be neglected in determining such compensation is indicated in Section 24. By operation of Sub-section (2) of Section 26, the award made determining the amount of compensation shall be deemed to be a decree while the statement of the grounds of every such award is deemed to be the judgment, for the purpose of CPC. The above perspectives from Part III make it clear that the award of the court is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Section 26. In other words, the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 28-A excludes the requisite time taken for obtaining the copy of the award and in computation of the period of three months from the date of the award, the time required to obtain a certified copy of the award should be excluded. Limitation begins to run from the date the award was pronounced by the court under Section 26. It is well-settled that the law of limitation limits the time after which a suit or other proceeding cannot be entertained in a court of justice or before appropriate authority, 'though it does not affect the substantive rights of the parties. Once the limitation begins to run, it runs in its full course until its running is interdicted by an order of the court. Explanation to Section 11 provides internal evidence in this behalf to make the point poignantly clear which states that in computing two years period to make award under s. 11, the period during which any action or proceeding to be taken in pursuance of the declaration under Section 6 is stayed by an order of a court, should be excluded. The legislature prescribed three months' limitation to quicken diligence like caveat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 18 was decided either before that date or thereafter or if an award under s. 11 was made after September 24,1984 and the reference made thereon to court under Section 18 was decided after that date. At one point, we were inclined to agree that Section 28-A operates from April 30, 1982, the date on which the first Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, was introduced in the Parliament but para 3 of the Financial Memorandum made it explicit that the original Bill did not contain Section 28-A. On a review, Section 28-A was introduced for the first time in 1984 Bill. Admittedly, the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 has come into force on September 24,1984. Section 28-A was not given retrospective effect unlike Section 34 of the Act, as amended by Section 20 of the Amendment Act. Section 30(3) of the Amendment Act gives retrospective effect to Section 34 to award interest in any proceedings, at any stage, of determining computation as provided in Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 30(3) of Amendment Act. By operation of Section 30(1) of the Amendment Act Section 23(l-A) was given prospective operation under Section 30(1)(a) and limited retrospective operation as transitional provision and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e it effective. If the statute is ambiguous or its meaning is uncertain, interpretation is resorted to for ascertaining what the legislature meant by the words in the statute, although they do not express the legislative interest clearly and perfectly. In other words, if the statute is plain, certain and free from ambiguity, a bare reading of it suffices and its interpretation can never arise, In discovering the legislative intent, courts are not exercising legislative power but apply the rules of common sense applying certain legal principles. 25. Sub-s.(1) of Section 28A reads that where an award under this part, the court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under s. 11, the person interested in all other lands covered by the same notification under Section 4(1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A retrospectivity. In other words Section 28-A is prospective in its operation. 27. The question therefore is under what circumstances the award under s. 11 is liable to reopen under Section 28-A and redetermination is done? Normally the legislative purpose is to remedy some existing evil or to correct some defect in existing law or to create a new right and remedy. Section 18 or Section 31 have not been amended. Non-availment of right of reference to claim higher compensation has been lost either by receiving compensation from the Collector without protest or failed to make an application within the prescribed limitation due to poverty, indigence or inarticulation. Without suitably amending Sections 18 and 31, Section 28-A was enacted creating new rights and remedies as a complete Code in itself. 28. Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes, 11th E. at p. 79, it is stated thus:-"general words and phrases, therefore, however wide and comprehensive they may be in their literal sense,' must, usually, be construed as being limited to the actual objects of the Act. It would be "perfectly monstrous" to construe the general words of the Act so as to alter the previous policy of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... If it is found that a number of such expressions have to be subjected to limitations or qualifications, and that such limitations or qualifications are of the same nature, that forms a strong argument for subjecting the expression in dispute to alike limitation or qualification. In Bennion's Statutory Interpretation at p. 385, it is stated that however the true view is not that strict and liberal construction are in themselves interpretative criteria. They are simply methods or techniques by which the court applies the interpretative criteria. In Statutory Interpretation by Cross at p. 145 in the Chapter presumption against unclear changes in the law, it is stated that the name "prescription against under changes in the law" goes back to the days when, by far, the greater proportion of law was common law and statutes were, for the most part, thought of as minor emendations of that law. In modern times it is possible to make a travesty of the presumption by stating it in some such form as that "it is to be presumed that a statute alters the common law as little as possible." At p. 146 it is stated that no useful purpose would be served by multiplying examples, but it should be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccorded to strict or liberal construction, it would make no difference whether statute involved was penal, criminal, remedial or in derogation of any rights as a distinction based upon its classification would then mean nothing." Strict or liberal construction, therefore, should be used as a tool in the process of ascertaining the legislative intent when it is in doubt. Otherwise they will have little or no value. This is a part of interpretive process assigned to the court as a subject to make the legislative intent, clear, effective and efficacious. 32. In Union of India and Anr. v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by Lrs. etc. : [1989]178ITR548(SC) in para 32 the Constitution Bench, considering the scope of Section 30(2) of the Amendment Act had applied restricted interpretation to the words of width employed in Section 30(2) holding that Section 30(2) clearly intended to refer to the awards made by the Collector or Court between April 30, 1982 and September 24, 1984. In other words Section 30(2) of the Amendment Act extends the benefit of enhanced solatium to cases where the award by the Collector or the Court is made between April 30,1982 and September 24,1984 or the appeals arising fro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... operation. A statute is not retrospective merely because it effects existing rights nor it is retrospective merely because a part of the requisites for its action is drawn from a time anticident to its passing. However, in K.S. Paripooman v. State of Kerala S.L.P. (C) No. 5514-17/90 etc., dated September 12, 1994, a Constitution Bench per majority interpreting Section 23(lA) and Section 30 of Transitory Provisions and the Scheme of the Amendment Act held that Section 23(lA) does not apply to the award of the Collector or Civil Court made prior to April 30, 1982 and restricted to the cases covered by Sections 30(1)(a) and (b). In other words it again reiterated the restricted interpretation given in Raghuveer Singh's case. 33. At this juncture, it is necessary to dispose of yet other contention argued on behalf of the States that Section 28-A is only a transitional provision applicable to pending cases only. If the legislature intended, after the Amendment Act had come into force, legislature did not intend to preserve the remedy of reference under Section 18, if successful at the first instance and if one or several claimants had reference and became successful to provide sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the Amendment Act had come into force, the award under s. 11 is not liable to be reopened for redetermination of compensation even through three months's period has not expired by September 24, 1984 for to hold otherwise would amount to giving retrospective operation to Section 28-A. Any other non-protester claimant will not be entitled to get an award reopened under s. 11 though on reference at the instance of one or other of the owner or interested person had the benefit of determination of higher compensation by an award made under Section 26 before Sept. 24, 1984 on his reference under Section 18 made prior to Sept. 24,1984. An award under s. 11 made prior to Sept. 24, 1984 and a reference under Section 18 sought and secured was pending in the civil court on September 24,1984 and civil court determines higher compensation on or after Sept. 24,1984, persons interested in other land covered by the same Notification under Section 4(1) would be entitled to make an application/applications in writing to the Collector to redetermine the compensation and to make an award under Section 28-A(2) on the basis of the award and decree under Section 26. It would be so, for that would n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., other than non-protesters to specify the date on which the court will proceed to determine the objection specified in Section 21. The notice shall be served on all persons interested in the objection - vide Section 20(b), if the objection relates to the area of the land or to the amount of compensation, the notice also shall be served on the Collector. Section 21 expressly restricts the scope of the proceedings and consideration of the interest of the persons affected only to the extent of "Objection" and the determination is restricted to those objects only. If the objections relate to "determination of compensation' and the civil court enhances compensation, on the basis of excess compensation awarded under Section 26, the other person interested in other lands covered by the same Notification, are entitled to an award under Section 28-A(1) and (2). If it relates to any other objection, Section 28-A becomes inapplicable and, therefore, the award of the Collector under s. 11, unless properly challenged, by a reference under Section 18, should not be reopened. 36. As regards claim for higher compensation, Sub-section (1) of Section 28-A envisages the awarding of higher compe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e under Section 18 of the Act. If these conditions are satisfied, the petitioners could have availed of the remedy provided under Section 28-A of the Act. In Scheduled Caste Co-operative Land Owning Society, Bhatinda v. Union of India and Ors. : AIR1991SC730 , this Court held that "it is obvious on a plain reading of Sub-section (1) of Section 28-A that it applies to only to those claimants who had failed to seek reference under Section 18 of the Act. The redetermination has to be done by the Collector on the basis of the compensation awarded by the Court. In the reference under Section 18 of the Act, an application in that behalf has to be made to the Collector within 30 days from the date of the award. Thus only those claimants who had failed to apply under Section 18 are conferred with the right to apply to the Collector for redetermination and not all those like the petitioners who had not only sought a reference under Section 18 but had also filed an appeal in the High Court". This is also clear from a reading of the scheme of the Act in Part II and HI and in particular the self-contained Code in Section 28-A. It is already held that an interested person who received compensat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cannot fall back upon the right and remedy under Sub-section (1) of Section 28-A as the public policy envisaged is that such a party cannot agitate his right twice over. Sub-section (1) of Section 28-A, therefore, by the non obstante clause made available the right and remedy to the poor and inarticulate persons interested in other lands covered by the same Notification under Section 4(1) and made no application under Section 18 to avail the right and remedy under Section 28-A(1). But those who sought and secured reference under Section 18, be the poor or others, and failed before the civil court or in appeal under Section 54 or under Article 136 etc., the right and remedy provided by Section 28A(1) is not available to him/them. In other words, the operation of Section 28-A is confined to the award made in Part HI only and not to the judgment or decree of the High Court or the appellate court under Section 54 or of this Court under Article 132, 133 or 136 of the Constitution. Therefore, the unsuccessful interested persons who sought and failed in the reference under Section 18 or in appeal under Section 54 or under Article 136 etc., are not persons aggrieved under Sub-section (1) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder Section 31, should explain in vernacular language of the claimant informing all persons interested in the compensation that they have a right to protest the compensation determined under s. 11 before receiving the same; has right to seek reference in writing under Section 18 to the civil court and that the application should be made expressing the specific objections in writing within the limitation prescribed under Section 18. In case of his failure to avail of the same, he would not be entitled to further right and remedy to seek higher compensation. In case the claimant to be illiterate, it should be properly explained to him in his mother tongue. The statement made in this behalf by the Collector should be in the mother tongue of the claimant. The Collector should append a certificate that it was truly, correctly and properly explained and obtain the signature or thumb impression in token thereof and this should be kept as part of the record of the award proceedings. He should also maintain a regular register in his office in the serietum duly signed by him and sealed and be kept in the personal custody of the Collector. This would not only obviate the hardship to the inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for redetermination. With a view to save 'A', or 'B' or the State from the consequences of such incongruous situations the Collector/L.A.O. should stay his hands in the matter of redetermination of compensation till the appeal is finally disposed of and he should redetermine the compensation only on the basis of the final judgment and decree of the appellate forum. Adoption of such course, would not merely avoid the chance element in the claimants getting the amounts of redetermined compensation but also avoids needless burden on public exchequer. As soon as the award of the civil court is carried in appeal, it becomes obligatory for the collector to keep the application/applications for redetermination of compensation filed within limitation pending awaiting decision by the appellate forum and to redetermine the compensation on the basis of the final judgment and decree. Normally, the L.A.O. would file the appeal against the enhanced compensation in a decree of either the civil court or the High Court and will know their pendency. In the case of appeal filed by the interested persons, the latter should inform the Collector/L.A.O. of the pendency of appeal or otherw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... non-acceptance keeps the award at large, subject to determination of compensation, on reference, under Section 18, by the court, which alone is a decision and a decree which would bind the claimant as well as the Suite. Against that decision, an interested person, i.e. the claimant as well as the beneficiary are given the right to file appeal against the decree and award under Section 26 but that does not clothe either the State or the beneficiary to seek a reference under Section 18. Though the Collector and the High Court had not considered the case from this perspective, for these reasons, the case does not warrant interference. 42. Having given our anxious consideration to the respective contentions, we are of the view that the respondents are right in their contention. Award under Section 11 is only an offer made by the Collector on behalf of the State and the State is bound by the offer. If the offer is accepted without protest and the claimant receives the compensation under Section 31, the proceedings get concluded and no further steps need be taken under the Act. The claimant, if receives the compensation under protest and makes an application under Section 18 in the pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on or omission in Section 28-A(2). The participation in the proceedings and right to an opportunity of hearing including the right to adduce evidence by the beneficiary though in normal parlance carries with it the right to an appeal, in view of the scheme and the language of s. 11 under Section 28A(2) does not clothe the beneficiary with a right to seek reference when he does not have such a right under Section 18. The award of the Collector under Sub-section (2) of Section 28-A though as a post s. 11 stage, nonetheless, the award under Section 28-A(2) is award and partakes the same character as an offer and not a decision. Therefore, if the applicant accepts the award, the award becomes complete and acceptance brings the proceedings under Section 28-A(1) to a terminus and the award binds the claimant and the Collector. On non acceptance and seeking a reference under Section 28-A(3), the award made under Section 28-A(2) is at large subject to the decision by the court by application of Sections 18 to 26 as is envisaged in Section 28-A(3) itself. Section 2-A of the local amendment made by the Haryana State Legislature adopting the Amendment made by the Legislature of the Himachal P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ply to such a reference. 45. After becoming aware of introduction of Section 28-A, it would appear that several antedated applications under Section 18 to make use of the awards to be made thereon under Section 26 by the civil court to get the benefit of Section 28-A. Therefore, when application made under Section 28- A create a doubt that the award under Section 26 which forms the basis for such application had been secured on an antedated or fraudulent applicant purported to have been made under Section 18, it shall be open to the State to have the matter thoroughly examined by an officer of the status of the District Collector/Commissioner to find the truth and such officer on enquiry made with reference to the relevant records and finds that the applications under Section 28A(1) are genuine and was/were made within limitation or the award under Section 26 is found on genuine application under Section 18 made within limitation and he could cause applications properly made under Section 28A(1), so that such award under Section 26 of cause may become unavailable for supporting the application, made fraudulently or collusive made under Section 28A be closed. However, it has to be ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ollector/L.A.O. He should issue notice to the applicant in each petition and give reasonable opportunity of being heard in person/counsel. He should consider whether the written applications satisfy the requirements of Section 28A(1) and were, in fact, filed the written applications within the limitation. Before proceeding as above, he could satisfy himself whether the award under Section 26 relief upon in support of the application made under Section 28A, was not made on the basis of antedated or fraudulent application under Section 18 or the applications themselves find under Section 28A(1) are antedated or fraudulently brought on record to claim the benefit under Section 28A(1). In case the findings are in favour of the claimant/claimants, then it is not necessary that there should be a second application, since the application already filed for redetermination of the compensation after the earlier award and decree of the civil court under Section 26 is sufficient compliance with the requirement of Section 28-A(1). On the basis of the judgment and decree of. the High Court which has become final i.e. later one, the Collector/L.A.O. should re-determine the compensation taking int....