- (1.) Special leave granted.
(2.) These are the appeals by the appellants questioning the judgment of the High court of Andhra Pradesh dated 10-3-99 in crp No. 2279, 2280, 2282 of 1995 and crp No. 4022 of 1996. In these appeals there are 11 appellants in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15481/99, one appellant in the appeal arising out of SLP (C) no. 15483/99 and three appellants in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15484/ 99, seven appellants in the appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15485/99. All these appellants contended that the judgment of the high Court not allowing them to have a reference under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act, is liable to be set aside.
(3.) The High Court came to the conclusion inter alia that the reference Court is not entitled to amend a reference under sections 30 and 31 into a reference also under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition act. The High Court had given other findings against the appellants but it is not necessary for the purpose of these appeals to refer to them. Suffice it to say that after the award was passed on 16-1-76 the first appellant Ajjam Linganna in SLP No. 15481/ 99 was the only person who filed an application before the Land Acquisition Officer seeking a reference under Section 18. By that date it appears that a reference under sections 30 and 31 was pending before the civil Court. The Land Acquisition Officer did not take any action upon an application filed by Ajjam Linganna seeking a reference under Section 18. Thereafter, the said claimant filed an application in the court seeking reference under Section 18 and for amendment of the existing reference under Section 30 and 31. This was allowed by the reference Court on 16-12- 93. Subsequently, other appellants in these appeals had also made applications to the reference Court on 10-12-93 and obtained orders of impleadment on 25-1-94 and proceeded to seek enhancement of compensation.;