Application Filed Before Subordinate Authority Within Limitation Period is Valid if Forwarded to Competent Authority

The applicants challenged an order dated 30.06.2023 passed by the trial Court (Reference Court), which rejected their reference proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the grounds of limitation

The award was finalized on 31.07.2014

The applicants filed a reference application before the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) on 22.01.2015, who subsequently forwarded it to the Collector

The Reference Court held the application barred by limitation, concluding the applicants were present during the award's making and failed to apply within six weeks

A preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of a civil revision against such an order was also raised

1. Whether a civil revision is maintainable against an order rejecting reference proceedings on the grounds of limitation

2. Whether the reference application was barred by limitation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

The Court relied on the precedent set by a Coordinate Bench in Somali vs State of M.P. & others (Civil Revision No. 42 of 2015), which established that the rejection of reference proceedings on limitation grounds does not constitute an "award" under Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, making a revision petition maintainable

Regarding limitation, the Court applied Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which prescribes a six-week limitation if the person was present when the award was made, and six months in other cases

The Court first resolved the maintainability issue by following the rule that such rejections are not "awards" and thus subject to revision

On merits, the Court found the Reference Court’s finding—that the applicants were "present" at the time of the award—erroneous. Merely responding to a Section 9 notice does not constitute presence during the making of the award under Section 18(2)(a)

The Court reasoned that a "formalistic and ritualistic approach" regarding which office received the paper would defeat the interest of justice, especially since the Collector had already acted upon the transferred application

The High Court allowed the revision, set aside the trial court's order, and remanded the matter to the Reference Court for a decision on the merits. The parties were directed to appear before the Reference Court on 17.08.2026