ORDER
L. Narasimha Reddy, J.
1. Notifications under Sections 4(1) and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') were issued for the purpose of acquiring an extent of Ac.1-18 guntas of land in Sy.Nos. 80 and 81 of Fatehnagar Village, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioner claims to be one of the partners of Friend Hills Company. The said firm was notified as one of the owners/occupiers of the land notified for acquisition. Notice under Section 9 of the Act was issued on 4-4-2002. The petitioner claims that he was not in station and since the acquisition was by invoking urgency clause, he did not respond to the same. The award was passed by the 1st respondent on 17-8-2002. Since there were rival claims as to the entitlement to receive the compensation for the acquired land, the 1st respondent referred the matter to the Civil Court under Sections 18 as well as 30 of the Act.
2. The petitioner came to know about the matter only after the award was passed and the matter was referred to the Civil Court. Hence, he submitted an application dated 31-10-2002 seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act. Since no steps were taken thereon, he has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to refer his claim to the competent Court.
3. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner did not make any claim in response to the notice issued under Section 9(3) and as such there was no occasion to deal with his claim. It is stated that since there were several claims, a reference was made under Sections 18 and 30 of the Act. The respondents contend that once the matter is referred to the Civil Court, at the instance of some of the claimants, there does not exist any further necessity to refer the very matter once again to the Civil Court.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Vilas V. Afzulpurkar submits that there is nothing in law, which prohibits the petitioner to get the matter referred to the Civil Court. He contends that but for the urgency with which the matter was proceeded with, the petitioner would have submitted a claim before the award came to be passed. Placing reliance on the definition of 'person interested' in Section 3(b) of the Act and the entitlement of such 'person interested' to seek reference as provided under Section 18(2)(b), the learned Counsel submits that there does not exist any justification for the 1st respondent in refusing to refer the matter.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, on the other hand, submits that once the Land Acquisition Officer has referred the matter under Sections 18 and 30 of the Act, it is not at all permissible in law to make a further reference of the very matter, at the instance of another person. He further submits that if the petitioner intends to press his claim, he can as well file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC to get himself impleaded in the pending reference.
6. The petitioner claims substantial interest in the land, which was acquired. It is not in dispute that he did not submit a claim in response to notice issued under Section 9(3). The petitioner contends that the entire matter was proceeded with, with utmost urgency and the petitioner was not even aware of the factum of the land having been acquired or about the award. Under these circumstances, it needs to be seen as to whether any reference under the Act is permissible at the instance of a person, who did not submit his claim during the award proceedings.
7. The Act contemplates reference to Civil Court both under Section 18 and Section 30 of the Act. While the reference under Section 30 is confined to adjudication as to the entitlement of the one or some of the several claimants to receive the compensation, reference under Section 18 is comprehensive, as regards quantum of compensation as well entitlement to receive the same.
8. Reference under Section 18 is required to be made at the instance of 'person interested'. 'Person Interested' is defined under Section 3(b) of the Act. It reads as under:
'3. In this Act, unless there is something repugnant in the subject or context,--
(b) the expression 'person interested' includes all persons claiming an interest in compensation to be made on account of the acquisition of land under this Act; and a person shall be deemed to be interested in land if he is interested in an easement affecting the land'
Section 18 contemplates two situations, in the matter of reference. While reference at the instance of person interested, who was present or was represented before the Collector when the award is passed, is required to be made only on a written application, made within 6 months from the date of the Award, such a reference at the instance of the person who was not present or was not represented, is required to be made on an application made within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or 6 months from the date of Award, whichever is later. This is evident from a reading of sub-section 2 of Section 18 of the Act. It reads as under;
'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.
(2) The application shall state the grounds on which objection to the Award is taken:
Provided that every such application shall be made--
(a) if the person making it was present or represented before the Collector at the time when he made his award, within six weeks from the date of the Collector's award;
(b) in other cases, within six weeks of the receipt of the notice from the Collector under Section 12, Sub-section (2), or within six months from the date of the Collector's award, whichever period shall first expire.'
9. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was neither present nor was represented before the 1st respondent when the award was made. The procedure stipulated under Sub-section 2(b) of Section 18 gets attracted to the case of the petitioner. The application made by the petitioner seeking reference is within 6 months from the date of award. There is nothing in Section 18 or any other provision, which prohibits the Land Acquisition Officer to make more references than one, in respect of the same property. The variety of situations provided for under Section 18, if at all any thing, suggest the otherwise.
10. It is true that the 1st respondent referred the matter to the Civil Court at the instance of some persons who were present or were represented when the award was pronounced. That fact by itself does not disentitle the petitioner to seek a reference. It may be that on account of similarity of claims, Civil Court may club and decide the matters together. Requiring the petitioner to file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC does not appear to be in consonance with the purport of Section 18. It is true that a Larger Bench of this Court in Repaka Bhyravamurthy v. Muppidi Venkataraju, : 2001(5)ALD815 , held that it is always open to a person, who has not participated in the Award enquiry, to file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC in a reference made under Section 30, which may be pending in a Civil Court. Such an observation was not made as regards reference, which is made under Section 18. Inasmuch as the reference that is pending before the Civil Court consisting the present award is the one under Sections 18 and 30, the petitioner cannot be compelled to make an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. Restricting the claim of the petitioner to the reference under Section 30 may have its own ramifications on the relief claimed under Section 18.
11. Having regard to the provisions of Section 18 of the Act and the petitioner answering the description of 'person interested', this Court observed that the 1st respondent was under obligation to make a reference to the competent Civil Court when the petitioner made the application. The writ petition is allowed and the 1st respondent is directed to make a reference under Section 18 of the Act in relation to the Award dated 17-8-2002 at the instance of the petitioner within 4 weeks from today. No costs.