wp2457-11.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2457 OF 2011 Smt.Sarojini Tanaji Shitole & Ors .. Petitioners versus State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr.Ashok B. Tajane for the petitioners. Ms.P.S.Cardozo, A.G.P for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 30th JUNE 2011. P.C.: . This petition is directed against the rejection of the application made by the petitioner seeking the reference under section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. The application has been rejected on the ground that it is beyond the period prescribed by law for making a reference. 2 The Special Land Acquisition Officer in the impugned order has held that the application seeking reference has to be made in terms of section 12(2) either within the period specified wp2457-11.doc 2 therein or within six months from the date of the award. In the instant case, the application has been made after a period of four years from the date of the award. The factual position with regard to the making of the award and the date on which the reference is sought, has not been disputed. The only argument is that the application cannot be rejected because the reference has been made pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court in earlier proceedings. 3 I am afraid that the order of this Court cannot be read as contrary to law. The order does not in any manner over-ride the statutory provisions particularly with regard to limitation. This Court cannot issue a direction to the Collector to make a reference after the period prescribed by law has expired and particularly when the legal position is settled that section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 has no application to these proceedings. Further, this was not a case where this Court had in any manner indicated that the application which was made to this Court should be treated as substantial compliance with the legal provisions. For all these reasons, there is no reason to interfere wp2457-11.doc 3 with the order under challenge. Petition is dismissed. If the petitioner has any remedy available under the Land Acquisition Act and particularly, making an application under section 28A thereof, the same may be duly considered, if made, and without being influenced by the rejection of the application seeking reference and the confirmation of the said order by this Court in the present petition. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)