/ COURTFEES EXBVIPTED BY NOTIFICATION N0.996Q/D-2870/XXI- B/C.G./05 AS SPECSRED SN SCHEDULE I & H OF THE COURT FEES ACT 1870. ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR No. ^\ /2010. • [j^nmm First Appeal (M) No. _/2010. Appellants Non^applic&nts ^- .^••'.^>''\^ c^\..^w.^' ^ .^^" ^.. ^^, ^- "..•-y Respondent: Applicant State of Chhattisgarh through: (1) The Collector, Janjgir-Champa (CG) (2) The Land Acquisidon Officer, Sakti District Janjgir-Champa (CG) Versus Mordhwaj, S/o Nanhe Singh, aged about 70 years, by Caste Chandra, R/o Village Odekera, Tahsil Jaijaipur, District Janjgir- Champa (CG). APPEAL UNDER SECTION 54 OF THE LAND ACOUISITION ACT,1894. ^" ?v;^Z^ "%>.„. ^, '^7'''^'^^ APPELLANT: RE8PONDBNT8: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DB: Hon»bleI. M. QUDDUSI & Hon'ble G. MINHAJVDDIN, JJ ^ F.AtMl No.121/2010 State of Chhattisgarh aad aaofher Vs. Mordhwaj APPEAL UNDBR SBCTIONS 54 OF THB LAND ACQUISITION ACT.1894 Appearance: Mr. Vinay Hadt, Deputy Advocate General, for fhe State/appeUaiits. Mr. Rupesh Shrivastava, counsel for fhe respondent. Per I.M. GUDDUSI, J. ORAL ORDBR (04.07.2011) 1. The delay ia filiag the appeal has already been condoned. EarUer, fhe bunch appeals mcludiag F.A(M). Nos. 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 93, 96,97, 98 100 & 129 of 2010 have been decided by fhis Court by order dated 08th March, 2011, fhereforc, beiag in padty with fhose cases, we are iacliaed to decide fhe iastaat appeal ia terms of fhe said order. 2. This appeals has been filed by the State of Chhattisgarh under Section 54 of the Laad Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short <fhe Act> 1894) agaiast ftie iiapugned award dated 25.04.2009 passed by the leamed Addl. District Judge, Sakti, District Janjgir Champa in M.J.C. No. 15/2009 adsiag out ofthe laiid acquisition case No.390/A-82/2002- 2003. >^?^t 118s^ 1 i. ;:""i!y / Wt* 3. Brief facts of fhe case ia a nutshell are the Laad Acquisition Officer, Hasdeo Project, Jaajgir-Chaoipa passed fhe order dated 15.12.2003 granting certam compensation to ftie respondentfs). Being dissatisfied wifh fhe compensation, fhe respondents have filed application dated 09*02.2004 before fhe Laad Acquisition OflScer u/s 18(2) offhe Act aad fhe said appUcation was received by fhe Addl. Distdct Judge, Sakti on 13,04,2009. It appears fhat fhe learaed ADJ on fhe sarae date issued notice fixiag the very next date Le., 14.04.2009 for appearance ofthe parties, filiag of the written statement & documents aad for framiag issues. When the matter was taken up on 14.04.2009, fhe Court below has observed fhat no dociunent was filed by any of the parties and io. a hiirded manner passed fhe award on 25.4.2009 directing fhe appeUants to pay compensation @ Rs.330/- per sq. raeter treating flie laad m question as usable for rcsidential purpose. 4« It is relevazit here to quote Section 18 ofPart III offhe Laad Acquisition Act, 1894 which reads as under: ttlS. Reference to Court.—(1) Any person iaterested who has not accepted fhe award may, by written application to the CoUector, require that fhe inatter be referred by fhe CoUector for ftie determination of fhe Court, whefher his objection be to fhe nieasureinent of fhe laa.d , the amount of fhe coinpensation, the persons to whoin it is payable, or the appordonment of fhe compensation among tihie persons iaterested. (2) The appUcation shaU state the grounds on which objection to fhe award is taken: uo Provided fhat every such application shaU be made,- (a) if fhe person makuig it was present or represented before the CoUector at fhe time when he inade his award, wifhia six weeks from fhe date of fhe CoUector's award; (b) m ofher cases, withia six weeks of the receipt of fhe notice firom fhe CoUector luider section 12, sub-section (2), or wlfhia six months ficDm fhe date of fhe CoUector?s award, whichever period shaU first expirc.3' $. The application dated 09.2.2004 preferrcd by the rcspondent was referred by fhe Laad Acquisition OfiScer with an iaordiaate delay of 4 years vide reference dated 13.04.2009, which was rcceived by fhe First Addl. District Judge, Sakti on fhe same day. It is surprisiag to note fhat on fhe very same day, fhe raatter was taken up by the Addl. District Judge, Salrti directmg to send notice to the appeUant at village Odekera, TahsU Jaijaipur, Distt. Jaajgir Champa as weU as Laad Acqiiisition OflScer Hasdeo Pariyojna as also CoUector Jaajgir Chaaipa aad fbced fhe date for 14.04.2009 aad wifhia a short spaa of time, proceeduigs were concluded ia a hasty nianner on 25.4.2004 without considering aad conducting enquiry as to whefher fhe appUcation fUed u/s 18 of the Act and the reference thereofwere time barred or not. ^. In view of the above, these appeals are Uable to be allowed ia part setting aside fhe mipugaed awards of the Court below. Accordingly, we set aside the awards dated 25.04.2009 aad remit the matters back to the Court of ^ Addl. Distnct Judge, Sakti for decision afiiesh ia accordaiice wifh law ia fhe followiag terms : (i) That the interim orders staad discharged m view of the final decision. The deposits made under fhe mterim orders ia fhese appeals shaU be refuiided to the appeUant/State but fhe amounts wtuch have already been received by the respondent/private person shaU not be recovered froni fhein due to settmg aside of the impugned awards. However, fhe same shaU be subject to the fresh decision of tihe • reference by fhe Court below aad it wiU be open to fhe Court below to take fhe seciuity etc., for the disbursed amoiint from the respondent(s) if fhe circmnstaaces so warraiit» 1. As in the iastant appeal, it has been foimd that no rcceiving date has been mentioned aad the order sheets are also sUent about fhe date offitmg offhe appUcation for reference u/s 18 of fhe Act, 1894, it is directed that the appellant/State shall also issue directions to fhe Laad Acquisition Ofi&cers to maiataia records of tifcie Laad Acquisition Proceediags properly mentioning aU necessary entnes, such as date of receipt of appUcation, maintainuig order sheets diity entered ia the register, to be maintaiaed, if iiot already inamtamed ia every office of fhe Land Acquisition Officer and seal of fhe receipt should be there on the appUcations. :jL^ In the result, fhe appeal is allowed ia part with fhe aforesaid directions/obseryations, No order as to cost Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Rao