Shri. Antonio Joao Bosco Lobo And ANR., v. The State Of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary And ANR.,

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 326 OF 2017

1. Shri Antonio Joao Bosco 66 years of age, married, residing at House no. 5/203, Feira Alt, Mapusa, Goa.

2. Shri Luis Francisco de Piedade Lobo, 68 years of age, married ordinarily residing at Balbot Bastora, Goa, represented by the Petitioner no. 1, as his duly constituted attorney.

...

Petitioners V e r s u s

1. The State of Goa through its Chief Secretary with his office at Secretariat Complex, Porvorim, Bardez, Goa.

2. The Deputy Collector and Sub Divisional Officer with his office at Mapusa, Bardez, Goa.

...

Respondents Mr. V. P. Thali, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. D. Lawande, Advocate General with Ms. P. Sawant, Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondents.

Coram :- F. M. REIS, NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date :

th June, 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per F. M. Reis, J)

-2- Heard Mr. V. P. Thali, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. D. Lawande, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the Respondents.

2.

Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. 3.

Learned Addl. Goverment Advocate, waives service on behalf of the Respondents.

4.

The above Petition, inter alia, seeks for a writ of mandamus, directing the Respondent no. 2 to deposit the amount of compensation awarded in the Award passed in the proceedings for Land Acquisition wherein a sum of Rs.20,81,423/- was awarded in respect of a property surveyed under no.339/1 (Part) and 342/1 of Calangute Village. 5.

By the Award dated 26.08.2013, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation in respect of the said portion of the property to the tune of Rs.20,81,423/-. The Respondent no. 2 also observed that as interested parties in respect of the said land could not give a conclusive document of their respective shares, and on the basis of the promulgated Survey Records, the amount was directed to be deposited under Revenue Head. However, the Petitioners filed a Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for enhancement of the compensation awarded

-3by the Land Acquisition Officer. While submitting the said Reference, the Land Acquisition Officer had not deposited the compensation as awarded by such Award. The Petitioners thereafter moved an application before the Reference Court whereby an Order came to be passed on 23.12.2016, inter alia, directing the Land Acquisition Officer to deposit the said amount along with interest at the rate of 5% per annum. Being aggrieved by the said Order and on account of the failure on the part of the Respondent no. 2 in depositing the said amount, the Petitioners filed the above Petition seeking directions to pay the said amount to the Petitioners. 6.

During the course of the hearing of the above Petition, the learned Advocate General pointed out that the Land Acquisition Officer shall deposit the amount as awarded in the Award dated 26.08.2013 amounting to the said sum of Rs.20,81,423/- along with statutory interest as provided in Section 34 of the said Act of 1894 before the Reference Court and pointed out that such amount would have to be distributed by the Reference Court in accordance with law.

7.

Mr. V. P. Thali, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, however, pointed out that as there is no dispute or any other claims raised by any of the parties, the amount ought to have been paid to the Petitioners. Learned Counsel further submitted that no other interested party has put up any claim and, as such, there is no dispute raised making any Reference on

-4such count to the Reference Court would not be justified. 8.

We have duly considered the submissions of the learned Counsel. The dispute appears to be as to who is entitled to the compensation as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, reads thus :

" Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 18 Reference to Court.

(1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.

9.

On plain reading of the said provision, even a determination as to whom the amount of compensation is to be paid, can be referred to the Reference Court in terms thereof.

10.

In such circumstances, we find it appropriate to dispose of the above Writ Petition by accepting the statement of the learned Advocate General that the amount shall be deposited before the Reference Court. The Reference Court shall thereafter decide to pay the amount to the parties in accordance with law.

-511.

All the contentions of the parties on merits are left open. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

arp/*