' SYED TAHIR ALI SHAH, J.--- Government of Pakistan through Ministry of defence and Force Commander Northern Areas seek leave to appeal against the judgment/order passed by Chief Court Northern Areas on 29-8-2005 in Civil First Appeal No,5 of 2006.
2. Brief facts forming the background of instant case are that the petitioners approached the Collector Land Acquisition Gilgit (Settlement Officer having bestowed with the powers of Land Acquisition Collector) for acquisition of a piece of cultivated land in Jutial Gilgit owned by the respondent No,2. The Land Acquisition Collector after taking necessary steps towards the acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act passed an award vide No,S.O.(R)-1/798-800/98 on 23-6- 1998. The amount of compensation was fixed as Rs,2,01,250 for the acquired land. Either of the parties did not dispute the award so passed.
3. The compensation money as determined was not paid to the affectee land owner till 8-4-2000.
On 6-8-2001 the present respondents/ the effectee filed an application with the Collector under section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act asking for grant of compound interest through supplementary award. The Collector, as appeared from the record provided hearing to the parties i,e, the respondents and the representative of the Military Estate Office Circle Rawalpindi granted the application on 6-9-2001 and accordingly passed a supplementary award for Rs,30,111 as compound interest.
4. The beneficiaries, the present petitioner not satisfied with the supplementary award filed an objection petition to the Collector which was referred to the Referee Court as envisaged in order- sheet of the Referee Court, dated 16-4-2002. The parties to said reference were provided ample chances to contest the application under reference and ultimately the learned Referee Court vide his judgment dated 22-6-2004 dismissed the reference as meritless.
5. Not contended with the findings so returned by the Referee Court the present petitioners challenged the same in the Chief Court, Northern Areas, which on its turn dismissed the appeal and maintained the order of the Referee Court hence this petitions for leave to appeal.
6. We have given our anxious thought to the argument advanced by the learned counsel, Mr. Ehsan Ali, Advocate, appearing for the petitioners. It is to be noted here that Mr. Muhammad Riaz, Advocate has initially filed the instant petition but later on Mr. Ehsan Ali, Advocate appeared and argued the case for the petitioners. We have also gone through the record and law connected with the case in hand. Learned counsel for the petitioners assailed the findings of the Chief Court Northern Areas on two-fold grounds:--
(a) That the petitioners (Local Authority) according to learned counsel was not heard while passing the supplementary award before the Collector and thereby, committed an illegality. The First Appellate Court failed to appreciate the points even.
(b) That the supplementary award passed by the Collector was without jurisdiction which the First Appellate Court failed to take into consideration.
7. Before evaluating the objections so raised by the learned counsel, in the scale of relevant provisions of law, it is pertinent to go through the competency to file the present appeal, the first appeal before the Chief Court and the reference against the impugned award. Relevant provision of section 50 of the Land Acquisition Act may be benefited to reproduced hereunder:-- "50. Acquisition of Land at cost of Local Authority or Company:--
(1) When the provision.......
(2) In any proceeding held before a Collector or Court in such cases the Local Authority or Company concerned may appear and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation.
' Provided that no such Local Authority or Company shall be entitled to demand reference under section 18."
8. The language of the above quoted section of the Act is quite clear and self-explanatory. The section rather restricts the right of reference by or on behalf of any Local Authority or Company against an award. The Military Estate, petitioner No,1 (Local Authority) and Federal Government do not possess any locus standi, to file appeal under section 50(2) of the Act. According to subsection
(2) of section 50 of the Act a Local Authority or a Company is only conferred a right to appear in proceedings before the Collector or the Court and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation but a reference under section 18 by them is barred. So for a Local Authority or Company is concerned the award becomes final. They have neither the right to ask for a reference under section 18, nor on a parity of reasoning, a right to prefer an appeal against the decision coming upon A on reference under section 18 of the Act by the Court. Reliance can safely be made on a decision of the Supreme Court of the Pakistan reported in PLD 1987 as case No,485 titled Pir Khan through his Legal Heirs v. Military Estate Officer at Abbottabad and others." As for the Central Government is concerned it has no role in the entire land acquisition proceeding. However, the Provincial Government according to the amendment introduced in section 18 can file such petition or an B objection if it does not accept the award. Similarly the Collector also enjoys a right to refer the matter before the Court for adjudication. In the present case neither the Provincial Government nor the Collector has challenged the award or made a reference to the Court.
Seemingly, the Collector has been arrayed as respondent in the instant petition as well as before the First Appellate Court and the Referee Court. It is, therefore, held that the petitioners have no right to prefer an appeal against the findings of the Referee Court nor any right to ask for a reference before the Collector as the statute has not conferred on them such right.
9. Coming to visit the objection raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners we find no substance in the arguments that petitioner No,2 was not heard by the Collector. The record reveals that petitioner No,1, the Military Estate Office appeared before the Collector, submitted his objection in writing and was given full chance to meet the allegation against it. Whenever a case is filed against the Military Authorities, the Military Estate is the proper person to represent such authority before the Court of law. The Contention raised does not hold water and is repelled.
10. Reverting to the next objection regarding want of jurisdiction to allow a compound interest by the Collector, he is not only competent to allow such interest rather he is bound under law to compensate the affectee owner in the shape of awarding compound interest if after taking possession of the acquired land and failure on the part of authority or company to pay the compensation. The legislation even declared any waiver on the part of landowner to be void and the landowner shall he entitled to the said interest notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary.
The objection is unfounded and not worth-consideration as the earlier one.
11. The present matter, as revealed ripen into litigation when the Local Authority, after taking possession of the land did not make the payment of compensation money for years. It has been noticed that usually in Northern Areas possession of the property, to be acquired is taken much prior to the acquisition proceedings being adopted properly as envisaged in the Land Acquisition Act. It is either the ignorance of law or the adhesion towards the Local Authority on the part of the Land Acquisition Collector. This tendency on the part of the Collector concerned has put the aggrieved landowners into untold turmoil compelling him to face the legal proceedings for years for his deprived rights. Land Acquisition Act has been termed as confiscating statute designed to deprive citizens of their valuable right in property through coercive measures by the State exercising its authority. Therefore, provisions of Act are ensured to be construed in its true letter and spirit for protection, prevision, and to maintain the right of citizen. Right to acquire, hold and dispose property is fundamental rights enriched by the constitution. Acquisition process employed to deprive someone of his property is an exception visualized by the Constitution and process to acquisition should be in consonance with condition, parameters and manners laid down in the Constitution.
If property of any persons is being taken over to serve the public purpose than at the same moment such person is to be given adequate," fair, just and due compensation. Property to be acquired in a particular case may be the only source of income or the acquisition may render the owner she her less. The Collector being the agent of the Government in acquisition matters, may not always lean towards the uncalled for interest of the Local Authority or Company but should safeguard the interest of an aggrieved owner within the umbrella of Land Acquisition Act. If the provisions of the Act is adopted in its true sense and dealt impartially the number of cases spelling out from the bold and intentional violation of the law can be minimized. Taking possession of any property on the strength of might without compensating the aggrieved owner is itself an offence and no right shall vest absolutely in the Government and Local Authority. Non-payment or payment made with certain amount of delay is also a factor for litigations in the Court. On the other hand Court being a guardian of fundamental rights of citizens, has to keep all such factors in mind while dealing with the acquisition cases and to ensure award of due and fair compensation to the affectees.
12. Whatever discussed above in detail, we do not find any merit in the petition for leave to appeal.
The petition is accordingly dismissed.
13. Copy of this order be circulated to all the Referee Judges and Collectors exercising powers under Land Acquisition Act throughout Northern Areas.