1997 INSC 0622
                                                       Tota Ram

                                                           Vs

                                                State of U.P. & Ors.

                                       (K. Ramaswamy, D. P. Wadhwa JJ)

                                                      09.06.1997

                                                        ORDER

1. This special leave petition arises from the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad, made on
November 19, 1996 in Writ Petition No.12843/94.

2. Admittedly, on reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the
"Act"), the reference Court passed its award and decree on May 18, 1990. The petitioner filed an
application under Section 28-A of the Act on July 22, 1992 stating that he came to know on 19th
July, 1992 that in another reference compensation for the lands had been enhanced and claimed
compensation at the said enhanced rates as he had filed application under proviso to Section 28-A of
the Act within three months of his knowledge. The Collector as well as the High Court have
negatived the contention. The question that arises for consideration is whether the limitation for the
purpose of application under Section 28-A of the Act begins to start from the date of the knowledge.
Section 28-A reads as under:

                  "28-A Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of
                  the court. - (1) Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant
                  any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under
                  Section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same
                  notification under Section 4 sub-section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award
                  of the Collector may notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the
                  Collector under Section 18, by written application to the Collector within three
                  months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of
                  compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of
                  compensation awarded by the Court:

                  Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to
                  the Collector shall be made under this sub-section, the day on which the award was
                  pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be
                  excluded.

                  (2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub-section (1) conduct an
                  inquiry after giving notice to all the persons interested and giving them a reasonable
                  opportunity of being heard and make an award determining the amount of
                  compensation payable to the applicants.

                  (3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub- section (2) may by
                  written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the
                  Collector for the determination of the Court and the provisions of Section 18 to 28
                  shall, so far as may be, apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under
                  Section 18."

3. A reading thereof clearly indicates that a person whose land is acquired under a common
notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Act but who failed to avail of the remedy of reference
under Section 18, is eligible to make a written application within three months from the date of the
award of the Court enhancing the compensation. It has been interpreted by this Court that the
"court" means court of original civil jurisdiction to whom reference under Section 18 would lie.
Admittedly, the award of the reference Court having been made on May 18, 1990, the limitation
began to run from that date. The proviso to Section 28-A gives a right to the persons to obtain the
certified copy of the award and decree and the time taken for obtaining the certified copy of the
award and the decree shall be excluded in computing the period of three months. In view of the
express language, the question of knowledge does not arise and, therefore, the plea of the petitioner
that the limitation of three months begins to start from the date of the knowledge is clearly
unsustainable and cannot be accepted. The High Court, therefore, is right in its decision in that
behalf.

4. The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.