the learned AGP as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner was that subsection 1 of section 28 A does not make a specific reference to the Award made on a reference under subsection 3 of section 28A. In fact, subsection 1 of section 28A provides that “ Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11”, a person aggrieved may apply for re determination of compensation. Subsection 1 applies when the Award of the Court allows the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector by an Award under section 11 of the said Act. The Award made on a reference under subsection 3 of section 28A of the said Act will be an Award of the Court under part III which is specifically referred to in sub section 1 of section 28A of the said Act. Thus, when such Award of the Court allows an amount in excess of the amount provided in the Award under section 11, an application under subsection 1 of section 28 will lie. Thus, an application will lie under said subsection even on the basis of the Award made by the Court on a reference made in accordance with subsection 3 of section 28A of the said Act. Therefore, the first submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no merit.
