ORDER : P.S. Rana, Judge. Present regular first appeal is filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 against the award passed by learned Additional District Judge Fast Track Court Kullu (H.P.) on 29.9.2007 in land reference case No. Tej Ram and others vs. Collector Land Acquisition and others. Brief facts of the case 2. Notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 was issued on 5.12.2000 whereby it was proposed to acquire land situated in Phati Dhaugi Sub Tehsil Sainj for construction of Parbati Hydro Electric Project. After completing all formalities Land Acquisition Officer Sub Divisional Officer (Civil) Kullu announced the award on 4.1.2002. Thereafter respondents preferred reference petitions under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 before learned Court below pleaded therein that land is situated near Sainj market which is central market of the area and land is potential of raising orchard, growing vegetables, construction of commercial buildings and hotels. It is pleaded that market value of land was not adequately assessed. 3. Learned Additional District Judge Fast Track Court Kullu H.P. passed the award on 29.9.2007 and enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) per biswa (Rs. 4 lacs per bigha) irrespective of nature, kind and classification of land. Learned Additional District Judge Kullu further granted interest @ 12% per annum on enhanced amount of compensation and also awarded 30% compulsory acquisition charges on enhanced amount of compensation. Learned Additional District Judge further directed that owners will be entitled to the interest on enhanced amount of compensation at the rate of 9% for first year from the date of notification under Section 4 of Act and thereafter 15% per annum till the amount is deposited in Court. Learned Additional District Judge further directed that Collector would pay interest as specified under Section 34 of Act to owners if not paid as a whole or any part thereof after due calculation. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of appellant and learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1 and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 and Court also perused entire record carefuly. 5. Following points arise for determination in RFA No. 7 of 2008:- 1. Whether RFA No. 7 of 2008 is covered matter as per award announced by Hon’ble High Court on 26.11.2014 in RFA Nos. 2 and 3 and Court also perused entire record carefuly. 5. Following points arise for determination in RFA No. 7 of 2008:- 1. Whether RFA No. 7 of 2008 is covered matter as per award announced by Hon’ble High Court on 26.11.2014 in RFA Nos. 6 of 2008, 8 of 2008 to 15 of 2008 and 17 of 2008 to 22 of 2008? 2. Relief. Findings upon point No.1 with reasons 6. It is proved on record that learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Kullu H.P. disposed of 17 reference petitions vide one award dated 29.9.2007. It is proved on record that Hon’ble High Court of H.P. on 26.11.2014 dismissed similar nature RFA Nos. 6 of 2008, 8 of 2008 to 15 of 2008 and 17 of 2008 to 22 of 2008 filed against the same award passed by learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Kullu (H.P.). While applying the concept of Article 14 of Constitution of India i.e. equality before law Court is of the opinion that it is expedient in the ends of justice to dismiss the present RFA also. Order passed by Hon’ble High Court in aforesaid RFA’s will apply mutatis mutandis in present RFA No. 7 of 2008. Point No. 1 is answered accordingly. Point No. 2 (Relief) 7. In view of findings on point No.1 present RFA No. 7 of 2008 is dismissed. No order as to costs. RFA No. 7 of 2008 is disposed of. All pending miscellaneous application(s) if any also stands disposed of.