1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.25 OF 2011 Smt.Leelabai wd/o Vitthalrao Kale Age about 70 years, Ooccupation Agriculturist R/o village Ridhora, Taluka Katol, District Nagpur. ….. Applicant. V e r s u s 1) The Collector Nagpur District, Nagpur. 2) Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kanholi Nala Project and Jam River Canal, Project No.1, Collectorate Premises, Civil Lines, Nagpur. 3) Executive Engineer, Nagpur Medium Project Division, Nagpur. ….. Respondents. Shri C.F.Bhagwani, counsel for applicant. Mrs.T.D.Khade, AGP for respondents CORAM : R. K.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 18th APRIL, 2011. .....2/- 2 Oral Judgment. 1) This civil revision application challenges the order dated 20.10.2010 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Kanholi Nala, Project Nagpur, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for reference to the Court for enhancement of the compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The application has been rejected on the ground that the reference is barred by limitation. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has held that the notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was served upon the petitioner on 9.7.2010 and the application seeking reference was submitted on 1.9.2010, which was beyond the period prescribed under Section 18(2) of the said Act. It is also the ground that for rejection of the reference that the applicant has not paid the Court Fees along with the application. 2) The notice for final disposal of the matter was issued on 9.3.2011. Mrs.T.D.Khade, the learned AGP appears for the respondent nos.1 to 3. The learned counsel submits that the matter can be decided finally at this stage. Hence, Admit. Heard the matter by consent of the parties. 3) The question whether the petitioner was served .....3/- 3 with the notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act on 9.7.2010 need to be established by leading evidence. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has not granted any opportunity to the applicant to lead the evidence to establish that the notice was received by the applicant on 26.7.2010. There is no evidence brought on record to show that the notice was actually served upon the applicant on 9.7.2010. Unless the parties are given an opportunity to lead evidence, the point of limitation, cannot be decided. The Special Land Acquisition Officer ought to have made the reference to the competent court by keeping open, the question of limitation to be decided by the Court. 4) So far as the question of payment of Court Fees is concerned, it is not the requirement of law that the application for seeking reference under Section 18, should accompany the payment of Court Fee. This is conceded by the Assistant Government Pleader. In view of this, the order holding that the application is not accompanied by payment of requisite Court's Fee, cannot be sustained. 5) For the reasons stated above, this Civil Revision Application is allowed. The order dated 20.10.2010 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, rejecting the application .....4/- 4 under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, is hereby quashed and set aside. The Special Land Acquisition Officer is directed to make reference to the competent court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, keeping the question of limitation open, to be decided by the reference court. No costs. JUDGE BRwankhede ...../-