- (1.) ONE of the questions involved in this appeal is as to whether the Improvement Trust has the locus standi to file a writ petition challenging the award of the tribunal given under the Punjab Improvement Trusts Act, and further as to whether the Improvement Trust is competent to file a Letters Patent Appeal. The decision of this question depends upon the interpretation of the words "person interested", used in Section 18 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which reads as follows: "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.) ON 10th of September, 1990, a Division Bench of this Court was of the opinion that since the matter was of importance and is arising in many cases and is likely to arise in future also, it was thought fit by the Bench that this question be decided by a Full Bench. The Bench directed that the Full Bench be constituted and the case be heard by the said Full Bench.
(3.) THE Full Bench of three Judges was constituted. The Full Bench of three Judges by its order dated November 28, 1990, referred the matter to a Larger Bench of five Judges. The order passed by the Full Bench of three Judges was as follows: "after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the earlier Full Bench judgments of this Court reported in 1981 PLR 335 and 1983 PLR 768 require reconsideration and therefore, this case is referred to a Larger Bench of five Judges. The necessary Bench be constituted and the case be fixed for arguments on 3. 12. 1990. ";