Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2034 (PNJ)

State of Haryana v. Maha Singh son of Ram Singh

2011-11-14

RAKESH KUMAR GARG

body2011
JUDGMENT Mr. Rakesh Kumar Garg, J.: (Oral) - This judgment shall dispose of 14 regular first appeals i.e. RFA Nos. 5478 to 5491 of 2011 as the same have arisen out of one common award of the Reference Court dated 10.12.2010 determining the market value of the land in dispute pertaining to village Bass Badshahpur Hadbast No.97 Tehsil Hansi District Hisar which was acquired by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘’the Act’’) on 24.11.2004 for a public purpose namely to construct Bass Multipurpose Channel on State expenditure. 2. The Land Acquisition Collector had assessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.5 lacs per acre irrespective of the kind of land along with statutory benefits vide his award dated 30.12.2005. 3. Aggrieved from the aforesaid award the land owners/interested persons qua the acquired land made applications under Section 18 of the Act alleging that the acquired land was very fertile and valuable and the amount of compensation as determined by the Land Acquisition Collector was insufficient and inadequate and while determining the compensation, the Land Acquisition Collector failed to consider the potentially of the land in question and various other factors which are relevant for determining the market value of the land. The market value of the acquired land was not less than Rs.40 lacs per acre. On receipt of the aforesaid reference applications, the same were referred to the Court of Additional District Judge, Hisar for adjudication. 4. In the written statement, the respondent-State besides taking preliminary objections, pleaded that the awarded amount was more than reasonable compensation which was determined after taking into account relevant factors and the rates prevailing in the area at the time of acquisition. 5. After appreciating the evidence on record, the Reference Court found that the acquired land was used for agricultural purposes only and even the residual land holdings of the respondent-claimants were also used for agricultural purposes. The Reference Court further found that the Land Acquisition Collector except awarding compensation for land (keeping in view the price of their land on the basis of minutes of meeting EX.R2), has not awarded compensation with regard to extraordinary hardship, severance of land, steep hike in the price of agricultural land, disturbance etc. The Reference Court further found that the Land Acquisition Collector except awarding compensation for land (keeping in view the price of their land on the basis of minutes of meeting EX.R2), has not awarded compensation with regard to extraordinary hardship, severance of land, steep hike in the price of agricultural land, disturbance etc. and thus, granted enhancement of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- over and above the compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Collector (i.e. From Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.6,00,000/- to the respondent-claimants. The relevant observations of the Land Acquisition Collector read thus: ‘’The LAC except awarding compensation to the petitioners, keeping in view the price of their land on the basis of minutes of meeting EX.R2 has not awarded compensation on any ground such as severance, extraordinary hardship etc. steep hike in the price of agricultural land in the area. Although, the petitioners have not been succeeded to prove exact magnitude of their severance, hardship, disturbance, enhancement in the price and moreover, there is no scientific formula to assess/guage or measure the exact magnitude of severance and hardship, therefore, considering the totality of the circumstances into consideration, this Court is of the view if market price of the acquired land is assessed @ Rs.6 lac per acre irrespective of the kind on the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 24.11.2004, it will suffice the purpose and ends of justice will meet. Hence, the market price of the acquired land is assessed Rs.6 lac per acre irrespective of the kind of the land, on the day of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act i.e 24.11.2004. Issue, partly, goes in favour of the petitioners.’’ 6. It may be relevant to mention that vide aforesaid notification dated 24.11.2004, land of village Bass Azam Shahpur was also acquired for the same purpose i.e. construction of Bass Multipurpose Channel. In that case also, the Reference Court has determined compensation at the rate of Rs.6,00,000/- per acre by giving the same reasoning as adopted in the instant case. It may be relevant to mention that vide aforesaid notification dated 24.11.2004, land of village Bass Azam Shahpur was also acquired for the same purpose i.e. construction of Bass Multipurpose Channel. In that case also, the Reference Court has determined compensation at the rate of Rs.6,00,000/- per acre by giving the same reasoning as adopted in the instant case. Even the market value of acquired land for other villages such as village Bass Akbarpur & Bhaklana acquired for the same purpose vide notification dated 24.11.2004 was determined @ Rs.6,00,000/- per acre and the said awards of Reference Court have been upheld by this Court in RFA No.2646 of 2011 (decided on 31.10.2011), RFA No.349 of 2011 decided on 24.2.2011 and RFA No.1107 of 2011 decided on 17.3.2011. 7. Keeping in view the aforesaid view taken by this Court, I find no merit in these appeals filed on behalf of the State and the same are hereby dismissed. However, the dismissal of these appeals filed on behalf of the State shall not effect the merits of the appeals of the land owners, if any. 8. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected cases. ----------------