Landowner's Right To Seek Reference Cannot Be Denied On Grounds Of Limitation When Compensation Not Paid: J&K&L High Court
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that rejection of a reference under Section 18 of the J&K Land Acquisition Act on the ground of limitation cannot be sustained where compensation awarded for the acquired land was never paid to the claimants.
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that where compensation awarded for acquired land has neither been paid to the landowners nor accepted by them, their statutory right to seek a reference under Section 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990 cannot be defeated on the ground of limitation.
The Bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed that the limitation contemplated for seeking reference would not operate where the compensation awarded under the Act has not been received by the claimants. He remarked,
“Where compensation has neither been paid nor accepted by the landowners, their right to seek reference cannot be defeated by rejecting the application on the ground of limitation.”
The Court was hearing a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Collector Land Acquisition/Assistant Commissioner Revenue, Anantnag, whereby the petitioners' request seeking reference of the dispute regarding adequacy of compensation to the competent civil court under Section 18 of the Act had been rejected.
The petitioners claimed ownership of land situated at Pahalgam, which had been acquired by the authorities for the purposes of the Pahalgam Development Authority. An award concerning the acquired land was passed by the Collector Land Acquisition in 1982 under the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990.
According to the petitioners, they were neither served with notice of the award nor were they paid the compensation determined under the award. Instead, they had approached the authorities seeking allotment of alternate land in exchange of the acquired land in terms of Section 32 of the Act, claiming that similarly situated landowners had been granted such benefit.
As no decision was taken on their claim, the petitioners earlier approached the High Court through a writ petition. The High Court disposed of the said petition by directing the respondents to release the compensation payable under the award along with statutory interest while granting liberty to the petitioners to avail remedies available under law.
Despite the directions issued by the Court, the compensation was not released to the petitioners. The petitioners thereafter initiated contempt proceedings. During the pendency of those proceedings, the respondents submitted that the compensation amount had been deposited before the Principal District Judge, Anantnag.
Subsequently, the petitioners filed an application before the Collector Land Acquisition seeking reference of the dispute relating to adequacy of compensation to the competent civil court under Section 18 of the Act. The Collector rejected the application on the ground that the request had been made beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the statute. Aggrieved by the rejection of their application, the petitioners approached the High Court.
Court's Observation:
The Court examined the scheme of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990, particularly the provisions governing the right of a landowner to seek reference of disputes regarding compensation. The Court observed that Section 18 of the Act confers a statutory right upon a person interested in the acquired land to seek reference of disputes relating to measurement of land, amount of compensation, or apportionment thereof to the civil court for adjudication.
The Court further noted that the limitation prescribed for filing an application seeking reference operates only when the claimant has received compensation or has been served with notice of the award as contemplated under the Act. Upon examining the record, the Court found that the petitioners had neither been paid the compensation amount nor had the respondents demonstrated that the petitioners had been served with notice of the award in accordance with law.
The Court also noted that the respondents had merely deposited the compensation amount before the court during the contempt proceedings, which did not amount to payment of compensation to the petitioners.
In these circumstances, the Court held that deposit of compensation in court without actual payment to the landowners cannot be treated as acceptance of the award so as to defeat their statutory right to seek reference.
The Court further held that the Collector had erred in rejecting the petitioners' application solely on the ground of limitation without examining whether the essential conditions triggering the limitation period had been satisfied. Accordingly, the Court held that the order rejecting the petitioners' application for reference was legally unsustainable.
Setting aside the impugned order passed by the Collector Land Acquisition/ACR Anantnag, the Court directed the Collector to make a reference to the competent civil court in accordance with Section 18 of the Act so that the question relating to adequacy of compensation payable to the petitioners may be adjudicated in accordance with law.
Case Title: Ghulam Mohammad Rah Vs UT Of J&K
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL)