Krishne Gowda vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court assailing the endorsement dated 27.02.2012 impugned at Annexure-J to the petition.

The petitioner claims to be the owner of the agricultural land bearing Sy. Nos. 544/3, 544/4, 546/24 and 546/25 to the different extents mentioned in the petition situate at Handinakere village, Hassan District. The said lands were acquired by the respondents. In respect of the compensation that had been awarded, the petitioner had not sought for enhancement under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. However, subsequently when the compensation was enhanced in LAC No. 68-77/2000 on 06.08.2005, the petitioner sought to take benefit of the provision contained in Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. In that view, the petitioner is stated to have made a claim seeking enhancement of compensation.

The respondent after entertaining the application for some time has thereafter issued the impugned endorsement dated 27.02.2012 stating therein that since the application was filed on 16.03.2006, the same was beyond the time provided in law by 60 days and therefore the claim cannot be entertained. The petitioner is therefore before this Court claiming to be aggrieved by the said endorsement.

The respondent has filed objection statement enclosing the documents thereto. It is pointed out from the copy of the claim application received in the office of the respondent to contend that the receipt of the application was on 16.03.2006 as per the seal affixed thereto and therefore, the presentation of the application being relevant for the purpose of computing the time, the claim as made would be beyond the time as provided in law. Hence, the endorsement is sought to be justified.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would however contend that the very document produced by the respondents viz., the claim application and the vakalath enclosed thereto would indicate the date as 17.10.2005. However, at the outset, it is seen that on the said presentation form, the seal of the respondent has been affixed whereunder the date is mentioned as 16.03.2006. But, in order to contend that in fact the application had been presented on 17.10.2005, the affidavit sworn to by the learned counsel who represented the petitioner before the respondent is filed at Annexure-L. In the said affidavit, the advocate has sworn to the fact that the presentation of the claim application was in fact made on 17.10.2005 and despite lapse of some time, there was no proceedings whatsoever held and therefore the petitioner once again contacted the office of the respondent and at that stage, since they were not able to locate the application which had been filed by the petitioner, once over again a copy was filed and thereafter the proceedings have been taken further. The said contention as put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner is however disputed by the learned Government Advocate.

In the light of the rival contentions that have been put forth, the issue as to whether the application was actually filed on 17.10.2005 or on 16.03.2006 would require determination by a factual finding in the instant petition. Such finding would not be possible herein since the affidavit as filed by the advocate even if controverted by a counter affidavit would serve no purpose. Therefore, by tendering evidence before the respondent, it would have to be established with regard to the date on which the presentation of the application was made. If this aspect of the matter is kept in view, considering the fact that the application filed by the petitioner even if it is assumed was on 16.03.2006 and thereafter the impugned endorsement has been issued, in such circumstance, an endorsement of the present nature would not be sustainable when a contrary claim is made by the petitioner. However, the claim as put forth by the petitioner cannot also be determined for the reasons indicated above.

Hence, I am of the view that an opportunity is to be granted to the petitioner to establish before the respondent on the fact as to the date of filing the application and in such proceedings, the respondent would have the opportunity of securing the cross-examination of the learned counsel for the petitioner based on the statement made in the affidavit and thereafter a finding be rendered with regard to the date of presentation and based on such finding, the further proceedings on the claim for enhancement of compensation be made.

To enable such exercise, the endorsement dated 27.02.2012 is quashed. The proceedings in No. 28A/370/05-06 is restored to the file of the respondent who shall provide opportunity to the petitioner and also conduct the proceedings in the manner as indicated above and pass afresh a detailed order in accordance with law. The proceedings shall be concluded in an expeditious manner.

In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.