IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1285 of 2006 Date of decision : 21.5.2009 Dhanpati and another … Petitioners Versus Land Acquisition Officer-cum S.D.O. (Civil) and others. …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg. Present :- Mr.Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Ashok Jindal, Additional, Advocate General, Haryana. Mr.Rajesh Arora, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral) The petitioners have filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of appropriate directions to respondent No.1-The Land Acquisition Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gurgaon, to refer their reference petition under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act to the court of District Judge, Gurgaon. As per averments made in this petition, the father of the petitioners, Umrao Singh was owner in possession of agricultural land as detailed in para No.1 of the revision petition. The said Umrao Singh expired on 26.7.1999 and the petitioners inherited their land alongwith respondents No.2 and 3. The aforesaid land was acquired by the Government of Haryana vide notification No.32/B/2001-4(G) dated 08.11.2002. On coming to know of the acquisition, the petitioners filed a reference petition under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act before respondent No.1 i.e. The Land Acquisition Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gurgaon, in order to have the same referred to the learned District Judge, Gurgaon for determination of the value and apportionment etc. Civil Revision No.1285 of 2006 It has been further averred that the right of the petitioners has been disputed by respondents No.2 and 3 on the basis of a Will dated 2.9.1996. According to the petitioners, the aforesaid Will is a forged and fictitious document and mutation sanctioned on the basis of said Will is nonest. Further case of the petitioners is that even they sent legal a notice to the Land Acquisition Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gurgaon. However, in spite of that their petition under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act is not being referred to the appropriate Court for determination of the value and apportionment etc. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Mr.Ashok Jindal, Additional, Advocate General, Haryana has very fairly stated that under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it was incumbent on the Land Acquisition Collector-cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Gurgaon to send the reference petition to the District Court, Gurgaon. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 has disputed the claim of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners had already filed a suit for declaration challenging the aforesaid Will and the same was dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. It is well settled that Collector is bound to make the reference when the application is filed and is not barred by 2nd proviso to Section 31. Moreover, it is not within the jurisdiction of Land Acquisition Collector to decide the entitlement of right to receive compensation. It is the jurisdiction of the Court who on reference will decide such question. 2 Civil Revision No.1285 of 2006 Whether the petitioners have any right for determination of the compensation and apportionment etc. will be seen by the appropriate Court i.e. District Judge and at this stage the only prayer is for directing respondent No.1 to refer the matter to the District Judge, Gurgaon for decision. In view of the aforesaid, this revision petition is allowed and respondent No.1 is directed to refer the petition (Annexure P-1) to the District Judge, Gurgaon, within a period of one month. It is needless to say that all the objections with regard to the merits of the case may be taken before the appropriate authority. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] Judge 21.05.2009 sd 3