Appeals Nos 262 to 264 of 1964
Appeals from the judgment and decrees dated January 5 and January 22 1959 and 24th November 1960 of the Patna High Court in appeals from Original Decrees Nos 401 of 1953 and 297 and 298 of 1954 respectively
SR Ghosal and RC Prasad for the appellant in all the appeals
DP Singh RK Garg SC Agarwala and MK Ramamurthi for the respondent in all the appeals
SUBBA RAO
J delivered a dissenting opinion
The Judgment of SHAH and BACHAWAT JJ was delivered by SHAH J Subba Rao J I regret my inability to agree with brother Shah J on one of the questions raised in the appeals namely whether the Land Acquisition Officer can after making the award under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 hereinafter called the Act fixing the compensation for the land acquired and apportioning the same among the persons interested in the land refer the question of apportionment under section 30 of the Act to the decision of the Court
Shah J held he could but with great respect to him I take a different view
The facts are fully stated in the judgment of Shah J and they need not therefore be restated here
The answer to the problem raised falls to be decided on a conspectus of the relevant provisions of the Act
Section 9 of the Act enjoins on the Collector to cause public notice to be given at convenient places on or near the land to be taken stating that the Government intends to take possession of the land  and that claims to compensation for all interests in such land may be made to him under sub section
2 thereof such notice shall state the particulars of the land so needed and shall require persons interested in the land to appear personally or by agent before the Collector at a time and place therein mentioned and to state the nature of their respective interests in the land and the amount and particulars of 579 their claims to compensation for such interests and their objections if any to the measurements made under section 8
Under section 11 on the day fixed or on any other day to which the enquiry has been adjourned the Collector shall proceed to make an enquiry and shall make an award under his hand of i the true area of the land ii the compensation which in his opinion should be allowed for the land and iii the apportionment of the said compensation among all the persons known or believed to be interested in the land of whom or of whose claims he had information whether or not they have respectively appeared before him
Under section 12 such award shall be filed in the Collector s office and  shall except as hereinafter provided be final and conclusive evidence as between the Collector and the persons interested whether they have respectively appeared before the Collector or not of the true area and value of the land and the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested   The group of sections viz sections 9 to 15 describes the subject matter and the nature of the enquiry to be held by the Collector and  provides for the making of the final award in respect of the said subject matter ss18 to 28 provide for reference to Court and the procedure to be followed therein in respect thereof
Sections 29 and 30 fall under part IV of the Act under the heading Apportionment of compensation
As the decision mainly turns upon these provisions it will be convenient to read them in full
Section 29
Particulars of apportionment to be specified Where there are several persons interested  if such persons agree in the apportionment of the compensation the particulars of such apportionment shall be specified in the award and as between such persons the award shall be conclusive evidence of the correctness of the apportionment
Section 30
Dispute as to apportionment When the amount of compensation has been settled under Section 11 if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the same or any part thereof or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable the Collector may refer such dispute to the decision of the Court
While section 11 imposes a statutory duty on the Collector to enquire in respect of the three matters mentioned therein sections 29 and 30 deal with the manner of deciding the dispute in respect of one of the said matters viz apportionment of the compensation fixed under section 29 if the claimants agree in the apportionment of the compensation the agreed particulars shall be specified in the award and the said award is final as between them
It is manifest that this agreement necessarily refers to the apportionment to be made under section 11 before the award is made for the section in terms says that the agreed particulars shall be entered  in the award
If there is no such agreement section 30 comes into play
It also refers to a stage after the compensation has been settled and before the apportionment is made and included in the award
If there was no agreed formula the Land Acquisition Officer has the discretion presumably when 580 there is a complicated question to refer the dispute in respect of the apportionment to the Court
But he need not do so if he thinks fit to decide the dispute for himself
The Land Acquisition Act discloses a well knit scheme in the matter of making an award
The Land Acquisition Officer after issuing notice calling for objections decides on the three matters prescribed in section 11 ie the true area of the land the amount of compensation and the apportionment of the compensation
Before making the apportionment of the compensation he can resort to any of the following three methods i to accept an agreed formula ii to decide for himself and iii to refer to the Court if he thinks that the decision of the Court is necessary
But once the award is made it becomes final and it can be reopened only in the manner prescribed ie by way of a reference under section 18 of the Act
This construction makes for the smooth working of the provisions of the Act and does not lead to any anomalies
It also does not affect the right of the aggrieved parties to proceed in the manner prescribed by the Act for getting the award vacated or modified  as the case may be
It is said that if this view be accepted a person who acquires a right after the award by transfer inter vivos or by devolution of interest will be without a remedy
I do not see any difficulty in that regard
Under section 18 he may ask for a reference
He may apply to be brought on record after the reference is made to the Court
It may also be that he may proceed in a civil Court to recover the compensation from the persons who received  it on the basis of his title
On the other hand the contrary view will lead to an incongruous position
It enables the Land Acquisition Officer to reopen a final award in the teeth of the express provisions of section 12 of the Act
It further enables him to make a reference without any period of limitation and thus to disturb the rights finally settled by the award
I therefore hold that the Land Acquisition Officer cannot make a reference under section 30 of the Act in the matter of apportionment of compensation after the award has been made by him apportioning the compensation under section 11 and  has been filed under section 12 thereof
During the course of the arguments it was suggested that as the interest of Dr Grant devolved on the Government it may be held that the Government was in substance brought on record in the place of Dr Grant in the reference made under section 18 of the Act to the District Court
But the point was not raised at any stage of the proceedings
Indeed no application was filed in the District Court for bringing the Government on record in the place of Dr Grant
In the circumstances I am not justified  in permitting the respondent to raise the said point for the first time before this Court
In the result I set aside the decision of the High Court and restore that of the District Court
The appellant will have his costs throughout
581 Shah J Dr Gregor Hug Grant hereinafter called Dr Grant  was the proprietor of the Dumka Estate in the District of Santhai Parganas in the State of Bihar
By a notification under section 41 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 published on June 8 1949 the Government of Bihar notified for acquisition a larger area of land out of the estate of Dr Grant for establishing an agricultural farm
 The Collector made on March 25 1952 awards setting out the true area of the land notified for acquisition compensation which in his opinion should  be allowed for the land and apportionment of the compensation among all the persons known or believed to be interested in the land
The awards were filed in the Collector s office on the same day
In respect of Plot No 142 Rs 57514were awarded by the Collector as compensation in equal shares to Dr Grant and the members of the village community who had also made a claim for compensation
In respect of Plot No 68 the Collector awarded Rs 2946 as compensation
In respect of acquisition of an area admeasuring 8891 acres consisting of several plots the Collector awarded Rs 164446510 as compensation and directed apportionment in the manner set out in the award
On May 5 1952 Dr Grant applied to the Collector under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act that the three matters be referred for determination by the Court of the amount of compensation payable to the owners
Similar applications were filed in respect of Plot Nos 68  142 by the members of the village community
In consequence of a notification issued under section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act 30 of 1950 the Dumka Estate vested on May 22 1952 in the State of Bihar
In exercise of the power under section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act the Government of Bihar took over possession on August 21 1952 of the Lands notified for acquisition
On October 15 1952 the Government Pleader submitted a petition before the Collector claiming that the compensation money awarded to Dr Grant had since the publication of the notification under the Bihar Land Reforms Act become payable to the State Government and the dispute between Dr Grant and the State Government regarding the right to payment may be referred to the Court under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act
The Collector made on November 5 1952 three references to the District Court Santhai Parganas
Two out of those references were made in exercise of powers under sections 30  18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the third under section 30
The District Judge by his order dated April 9 1954 held that the State of Bihar had no interest in the property notified for acquisition when the award was filed before the Collector under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act and the State could lay no claim to the compensation money awarded
The District Judge upheld the apportionment of compensation between Dr Grant and the village community and enhanced the valuation of the land and directed that compensation at the enhanced rate be awarded
582 Against the order of the District Judge in the references three appeals Nos 401 of 1953 2c7 of 1954 and 298 of 1954 were preferred by the State to the High Court of Judicature at Patna
The High Court held that title of the owner to the land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act could not be extinguished under that Act till possession was taken under section 16 of the Act and that since the title of Dr Grant in the land acquired stood statutorily vested in the State by virtue of the notification issued under the Bihar Land Reforms Act he was not entitled to receive the compensation money
In the view of the High Court title to the compensation money had vested in the State Government before possession was obtained by the State Government under section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act and that it was open to the Collector on a dispute raised by the State about the right to receive the compensation money to make a reference to the Court under section 30 of the Act
With certificate granted by the High Court these three appeals have been preferred by Dr Grant
Three contentions have been urged in support of the appeals 1 the Collector had no authority to refer the matter under section 30 after he had apportioned the amount of compensation under section 11 2 since title to compensation is derived solely from and on the date of the award the notification under section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act did not deprive Dr Grant of his right to receive compensation and 3 the State Government was not a person interested within the meaning of the Land Acquisition Act and could not apply for a reference under section 30
After a notification is issued under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act the appropriate Government may acquire the land notified in the manner set out in sections 7 to 16
Section 9 provides for an enquiry into the area of the land into compensation which is payable and apportionment of compensation
The Collector is by section 11 authorised to make an award setting out the true area of the land the compensation which in his opinion should be allowed for the land and the apportionment of the said compensation among all the persons known or believed to be interested in the land or of whose claims he has information whether or not they have respectively appeared before him
The award when filed in the Collector s office becomes final and conclusive evidence as between the Collector and the persons interested whether they have respectively appeared before the Collector or not of the true area and value of the land and the apportionment of compensation among the persons interested
The land vests absolutely in the Government free from all encumbrances when possession is taken by the Collector under section 16
By section 17 authority is conferred upon the Collector when in cases of urgency the appropriate Government so directs to take possession of waste or arable land even before making an award
Section 48 authorises the Government to withdraw from the acquisition any land of which possession has not been taken
583 By section 18 the Collector is enjoined to refer to the District Court for determination objections as to the measurement of the land the amount of compensation the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment thereof among the persons interested
Part IV deals with apportionment of compensation
If the persons interested agree in the apportionment of the compensation the particulars of such apportionment shall be specified in the award section 29 if there be no such agreement the Collector may if a dispute arises as to the apportionment of the compensation or any part thereof or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable refer such dispute under section 30 for decision by the Court
Part V of the Act which contains sections 31 to 34 deals with payment of compensation
Under section 31 the Collector has to tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award
By the third proviso to sub section
2 of section 31 liability of any person who may receive the whole or any part of the compensation awarded under the Act to pay the same to the person lawfully entitled thereto is not affected
Sections 32  33 deal with investment of money deposited in respect of land belonging to persons incompetent to alienate the land and  in other cases but with these we are not concerned
Section 34 obliges the Collector to pay interest at the rate of six per centum per annum if compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land from the time of taking possession until it is so paid or deposited 
There are two provisions sections 181 and 30 which invest the Collector with power to refer to the Court a dispute as to apportionment of compensation or as to the persons to whom it is payable
By sub section
1 of section 18 the Collector is enjoined to refer a dispute as to apportionment or as to title to receive compensation on the application within the time prescribed  by sub section
2 of that section of a person interested who has not accepted the award
Section 30 authorises the Collector to refer to the Court after compensation is settled under section 11 any dispute arising as to apportionment of the same or any part thereof or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable
A person shown in that part of the award which relates to apportionment of compensation who is present either personally or through a representative or on whom a notice is served under sub section
2 of section 12 must if he does not accept the award apply to the Collector within the time prescribed under section 182 to refer the matter to the Court
But a person who has not appeared in the acquisition proceeding before the Collector may if he is not served with notice of the filing raise a dispute as to apportionment or as to the persons to whom it is payable and apply to the Court for a reference under section 30 for determination of his right to compensation which may have existed before the award or which may have develoved upon him since the award
Whereas under section 18 an application made to the Collector must be made within the period prescribed by sub s2 cl
b there is no such period 584 prescribed under section 30
Again under section 18 the Collector is bound to make a reference on a petition filed by a person interested
The Collector is under section 30 not enjoined to make a reference he may relegate the person raising a dispute as to apportionment or as to the person to whom compensation is payable to agitate the dispute in a suit and pay the compensation in the manner declared
by his award
We are unable to agree with the view expressed by the Mysore High Court in Boregowda and another vs Subbaramiah and others that if the Collector has made apportionment of the compensation money by his award his power to refer a dispute under section 30 cannot be exercised
Clause iii of section 11 enjoins the Collector to apportion the compensation money among persons known or believed to be interested in the land he has  no discretion in the matter
Exercise of the power under section 30 to refer the dispute relating to apportionment or as to the persons to whom it is payable is it is true discretionary the Collector may but is not bound to exercise that power
It is however not predicated of the exercise of that power that the Collector has not apportioned the compensation money by his award
We are also unable to agree with the Mysore High Court that the power under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act has to be exercised on a motion within the period prescribed by section 182 of the Land Acquisition Act
In our judgment the powers exercisable by the Collector under section 181 and under section 30 are distinct and may be invoked in contingencies which do not overlap
By virtue of the notification issued under the Bihar Land Reforms Act the right of Dr Grant vested in the State of Bihar
On March 25 1952 when the Collector made an award under section 11 the only persons interested in the award were Dr Grant and the members of the village community but the title of Dr Grant in the land notified for acquisition stood by operation of the Bihar Land Reforms Act transferred as from May 22 1952 to the State of Bihar
A dispute then arose between the State Government and Dr Grant as to the persons whom compensation was payable
The State had no right to the compensation payable for the land under a title existing before the date of the award of the Collector and no application for reference could be made by the State as a person interested within the meaning of section 181
The title of the State to receive compensation arose only when in consequence of the notification under section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act the title of Dr Grant to the Estate was divested
An award by the Collector is strictly speaking an offer made to the person interested in the land notified for acquisition the latter may accept the offer but is not bound to accept it
He may ask for a reference to the Court for adjudication of his claim for adequate compensation
The person interested may even accept 1AIR 585 the compensation under protest as to the sufficiency of the amount and ask for a reference
It is also open to the Government even after the award is made but before possession is taken to withdraw from acquisition of any land in exercise of the powers conferred by section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act
It is therefore not the award of the Collector which is the source of the right to compensation the award quantifies the offer of the appropriate Government which is made because the Government has taken over or intends to take the land of the owner under the authority conferred by the Land Acquisition Act
In Serju Prasad Sahu vs The State of Uttar Pradesh and Others1 it was observed by this Court in considering the scheme of the Act that the right of the owner of the land is extinguished when Government takes possession of the land after an award of compensation is made
This is also supported by the scheme of the Act
Interest is made payable under section 28 on the additional amount of compensation awarded by the Court from the date on which the Collector had taken possession
Similarly under section 34 interest is made payable on the compensation from the date on which the possession is taken if the same be not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land
The right of the State of Bihar arose on May 22 1952 when the title to the land vested in it by virtue of the notification issued under the Bihar Land Reforms Act
There is nothing in the Land Acquisition Act which prohibits the Collector from making a reference under section 30 for determination of the title of the person who has since the date of the award acquired a right to the compensation
If after a reference is made to the Court the person interested dies or his title devolves upon another person because of inheritance succession insolvency forfeiture compulsory winding up or other form of statutory transfer it would be open to the party upon whom the title has devolved to prosecute the claim which the person from whom the title has devolved could have prosecuted
In Promotha Nath Mitra vs Rakhal Das Addy2 it was held that a reference made by the Collector under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act at the instance of a proprietor of land may be prosecuted by the purchaser of his rights after the award at a revenue auction
If the right to prosecute a reference by a person on whom the title of the person interested has devolved be granted there is no reason why the right to claim a reference of a dispute about the person entitled to compensation may not be exercised by the person on whom the title has devolved since the date of the award
The scheme of the Land Acquisition Act is that all disputes about the quantum of compensation must be decided by resort to the procedure prescribed by the Act it is also intended that disputes about the rights of owners to compensation being ancillary to the principal dispute should be decided by the Court to which power is entrusted
Jurisdiction of the Court in this behalf is not restricted 1AIR 2 586 to cases of apportionment but extends to adjudication of disputes as to the persons who are entitled  to receive compensation and there is nothing in section 30 which excludes a reference to the Court of a dispute raised by a person on whom the title of the owner of land has since the award devolved
It was strongly pressed that under section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act the Collector is bound to tender payment of compensation awarded by him to the persons entitled  thereto according to the award and that implied that a right in the amount of compensation arises to the person to whom compensation is directed to be paid under the award and therefore the only persons who can raise a dispute under section 30 are those whose names are set out in the award
This contention stands refuted by the plain terms of section 30
The Collector is not authorised to decide finally the conflicting rights of the persons interested in the amount of compensation he is primarily concerned with the acquisition of the land
In determining the amount of compensation which may be offered he has it is true to apportion the amount of compensation between the persons known or believed to be interested in the land of whom or of whose claims he has information whether or not they have appeared before him
But the scheme of apportionment by the Collector does not finally determine the rights of the persons interested in the amount of compensation the award is only conclusive between the Collector and the persons interested and not among the persons interested
The Collector has no power to finally adjudicate upon the title to compensation that dispute has to be decided either in a reference under section 18 or under section 30 or in a separate suit
Payment of compensation therefore under section 31 to the person declared by the award to be entitled thereto discharges the State of its liability to pay compensation subject to any modification by the Court leaving it open to the claimant to compensation to agitate his right in a reference under section 30 or by a separate suit
The dispute between the State of Bihar and Dr Grant has been expressly referred by the Collector to the Court for decision
Under the Bihar Land Reforms Act the title of Dr Grant to the Land notified for acquisition became vested  in the State and there fore the right to compensation for the land acquired devolved upon the State
A dispute between Dr Grant and the State as to their conflicting claims to the compensation money was clearly a dispute which could be referred under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Court and was in fact referred to the Court
We are unable to agree with counsel for Dr Grant that the reference made by the Collector under section 30 was incompetent because the State was not interested in the compensation money on the date when the award was made
The right of the State of Bihar has undoubtedly arisen after the award was made but once the title which was originally vested in Dr Grant stood statutorily transferred to the State it was open to the State to claim a reference not because the 587 State was a person interested  in the compensation money before the date of the award but because of the right which has arisen since the award was made
We therefore dismiss the appeals with costs There will be one hearing fee
ORDER Following the judgment of the majority the appeals are dismissed with costs
There will be one hearing fee


Summary:
The appellant owned certain lands in the State of Bihar in respect of which proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act were started
Under section 11 of the Act the Collector fixed the area of the land to be acquired and the compensation payable and also apportioned the compensation between the appellant and the members of the village community who had claimed compensation for some
portions of the land
The award was then filed under section 12
The appellant and members of the village community being dissatisfied asked the Collector to make
references under section 18 to the Court
After the award was given but before possession under section 16 of the Act was taken the Bihar Land Reforms Act 1950 was passed and by the operation of s3 of the Act the appellant s land became vested in the State
On behalf of the State an application was made to the Collector to make a reference to the Court under section 30 of the Act claiming that the compensation under the award was payable to it as it had acquired the appellant s title to the land
The District Court held that the compensation was not payable to the State but on appeal the High Court held in favour of the State
The appellant came to this Court with certificate
It was contended on behalf of the appellant that 1 the Collector had no authority to refer the matter under section 30 after he had apportioned the amount of compensation under section 11 2 since title to
compensation is derived solely from and on the date of the award the notification under section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act did not deprive the appellant of his right to receive compensation and 3 the State Government was not a person interested within the meaning of the Land Acquisition Act and could not apply for a reference
under section 30
HELD Per Shah and Bachawat JJ i There are two provisions in the Act under which the Collector can make a reference to the Court namely section 18 and section 30
The powers under the two sections are distinct and may be invoked in contingencies which do not overlap
A person shown in that part
of the award which relates to apportionment of compensation who is present either personally or through a representative or on whom notice is issued under section 122 must if he does not accept the award apply to the Collector to refer the matter to the Court under section 18 within the time prescribed thereunder
But a person who has not appeared in the acquisition proceedings before the Collector may if he is not served with notice of filing raise a dispute as to apportionment or as to the persons to whom it is payable and apply to the Court for a reference under section 30 for determination of his right to compensation which may have existed before the award or which may have devolved upon him since the award
For a reference under section 30 no period of limitation is prescribed
583E 584A 577 ii It is not predicated of the exercise of the power to make a reference under section 30 that the Collector has not apportioned the compensation money by his award
584D Boregowda and Anr
vs Subbaramiah and Ors AIR  disapproved
iii The award made by the Collector under section 11 is not the source of the right to compensation
An award is strictly speaking only an offer made by the Government to the person interested in the land notified for acquisition the person interested is not bound to accept it and the Government can also withdraw the acquisition under section 48
It is only when possession of the land has been taken by the Government under section 16 that the right of the owner of the land is extinguished
Therefore the appellant s contention that title to compensation is derived solely from and on the date of the award could not be accepted
584H 585C iv The liability of the Government under section 31 to pay compensation to the person entitled thereto under the award does not imply that only the persons to whom compensation is directed to
be paid under the award may raise a dispute under section 30
The scheme of apportionment by the Collector under section 11 is conclusive only between the Collector and the persons interested and not among the persons interested
Payment of compensation under section 31 to the persons declared in the award to be entitled thereto discharges the State of its liability to pay compensation leaving it open to the claimant to compensation to agitate his right in a reference under section 30 or by a separate suit
586B F v Under the Bihar Land Reforms Act the title of the appellant to the land notified for acquisition became vested in the
State and therefore the right to compensation for the land acquired devolved upon the
State
A dispute then arose between the State Government and the appellant as to the persons to whom compensation was payable
The State had no right to the compensation payable for the land under a title existing before the date of the award of the Collector and no application could be made by it as a person interested within the meaning of section 18
But a dispute between the appellant and the State as to their conflicting claims to the compensation money was clearly a dispute which could be referred under section 30 of the Act to the
Court
There is nothing in section 30 which excludes a reference to the Court of a dispute raised by a person on whom the title of the owner of the land has since the award devolved
584G 586A G H Promotha Nath Mitra vs Rakhal Das Addy 11 Cal
LJ 420 referred to
Per Subba Rao J i The Land Acquisition Officer cannot make a reference under section 30 of the Act in the matter of apportionment of compensation after the award has been made by him apportioning the compensation under section 11 and has been filed under section 12
The Land Acquisition Act discloses a well knit scheme in the matter of making an award
The Land acquisition Officer after issuing notice calling for objections decides on the three matters prescribed in section 11 ie the true area of the land the amount of compensation and the apportionment of the compensation
Before making the apportionment he can resort to any of the following three methods
i to accept  an agreed formula ii to decide for himself and 578 iii to refer to the Court if he
thinks that the decision of the Court is necessary
But once the award is made it becomes final and it can be reopened only in the manner prescribed ie by way of a reference under section 18 of the Act
It is not correct to say that on the above view a person who acquires a right after the award by transfer inter vivos or by devolution of interest will be without a remedy
Such a person may ask for a reference under section 18
He may apply to be brought on record after the reference is made to the
Court
He may proceed to the Civil Court to recover the compensation from the persons who received it on the basis of his title
On the other hand the contrary view will lead to an incongruous position
It enables the Land Acquisition Officer to reopen a final award in the teeth of the express provisions of section 12 of the Act
It further enables him to make a reference without any period of limitation and thus to disturb the rights finally settled by the award
580B G