1 CRA 4/2005 abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 4 OF 2005 Harishchandra Gangaram Shinde since deceased through his heirs 1) Malati Kisan Shinde 2) Sandeep Kisan Shinde 3) Arjun Kisan Shinde 4) Pallavi Kisan Shinde .. Applicants V/s The Special Land Acquisition Officer No.22 & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. Uday Warunjikar for the applicants. Ms. S.V. Sonawane, A.G.P. for the respondent. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 13TH JUNE 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. This revision application is directed against the order dated 12th April 2004 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 22 (exercising the powers of the Collector) rejecting the application of the revision applicants for reference to be made to the District Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act”). 2 CRA 4/2005 2. The award in question was passed on 2nd April 1997. The lands of Harishchandra Gangaram Shinde (hereinafter referred to as “the original owner”) were acquired under the award. Being aggrieved by the amount of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the original owner made an application on 16th June 1997 requesting the Collector to make a reference to the District Court under section 18(2) of the Act. That application was rejected as barred by limitation. His heirs have challenged that order in this revision application. 3. Since there was some dispute as to the date on which the notice under section 12(2) of the Act was served on the original owner, the State was directed to file an affidavit in reply. Accordingly, Mr. Ramdas Dadaram Khadtare, Special Land Acquisition Officer No. 22 has filed an affidavit in reply dated 28th February 2005 annexing thereto a photocopy of the register maintained by him regarding service of notices under section 12(2) of the Act. Relevant entry in the register is at page 43 of the revision application. It shows that the notice under section 12(2) of the Act was served on the original owner on 2nd April 1997. It bears the signature of the original owner. This register along with the affidavit of Mr. Khadtare proves that the notice 3 CRA 4/2005 was served on the original owner on 2nd April 1997. Proviso to section 18(2) says that an application for reference is required to be made within 6 weeks of the service of notice under section 12(2) of the Act. The application is filed beyond the period of 6 weeks of the service of notice and is, therefore, barred by limitation. Consequently, no error can be noticed in the order of rejection of the reference. 4. Mr. Warunjikar for the revision applicants submitted that the original owner died on 3rd April 2003 and since the order was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 12th April 2004 in the name of the original owner, it was without jurisdiction. It may be noted that the Code of Civil Procedure and in particular Order 22 thereof does not apply to the proceedings before the Special Land Acquisition Officer. It was therefore not necessary for him to bring the legal heirs of the original owner on record. In any event, it was for the legal heirs to bring to the notice of the Special Land Acquisition Officer that the original owner had died. They have not done so. No fault therefore can be found in the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer on that count also. 5. There is no merit in the revision application which is 4 CRA 4/2005 hereby dismissed, but in the facts and circumstances of the case without any order as to costs. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)