JUDGMENT : Sanjay Karol, J. 1. Challenge to the impugned Award dated 26.12.2012, passed by learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, in Land Reference Petition No. 68 of 2006, titled as Shamsher Singh & others vs. H.P.S.E.B. through its Secretary, Shimla & others, is led on the ground that the Court Below could not have awarded solatium @ 30% on the additional compensation so awarded under Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. Undisputedly claimants’ land situate in village Ganvi, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla, H.P. came to be acquired for public purpose namely construction of Ganvi Hydro Electric Project (Stage-II). Acquisition proceedings commenced with the publication of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 19.4.2003. The Collector Land acquisition passed his award on 12.9.2005. It is a matter of record that market value of the acquired land came to be determined @ Rs. 1,65,400/- per hectare. Finding the compensation to be inadequate the land owners filed petitions under Section 18 of the Act. Based on the previous awards passed by the Collector, with regard to the land acquired in the very same village for the very same public purpose, the Court below re-determined the market value of the acquired land by enhancing the amount to Rs. 64.31 per centare. 3. It is not in dispute that the claimants have accepted such findings. The grievance made by the beneficiary, to a limited extent, is only qua the grant of solatium @ 30% on the additional compensation as referred to supra. 4. Section 23 of the Act reads as under: “23. Matters to be considered in determining compensation. 64.31 per centare. 3. It is not in dispute that the claimants have accepted such findings. The grievance made by the beneficiary, to a limited extent, is only qua the grant of solatium @ 30% on the additional compensation as referred to supra. 4. Section 23 of the Act reads as under: “23. Matters to be considered in determining compensation. – (1) In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Act, the Court shall take into consideration – First – the market value of the land at the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1); Secondly – the damage sustained by the person interested, by reason of the taking of any standing crops or trees which may be on the land at the time of the Collector’s taking possession thereof; Thirdly – the damage (if any), sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector’s taking possession of the land by reason of severing such land from his other land; Fourthly – the damage (if any), sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector’s taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other property, moveable or immoveable, in any other manner, or his earnings; Fifthly – if, in consequence of the acquisition of the land by the Collector, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses (if any) incidental to such change; Sixthly – the damage (if any) bona fide resulting from diminution of the profits of the land between the time of the publication of the declaration under section 6 and the time of the Collector’s taking possession of the land. (1A) In addition to the market value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1), in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. Explanation. Explanation. – In computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any Court shall be excluded. (2) In addition to the market-value of the land as above provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of thirty per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition.” 5. Sub-section (1A) of Section 23 of the Act entitles the claimants for additional amount calculated @ 12% per annum on the market value of the acquired land. This is to be from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act or the date of taking over of possession of the land, whichever is earlier in point in time. 6. Sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act further entitles the claimants for additional amount @ 30% on the enhanced amount of market value. Section 23 of the Act does not provide that the amount of solatium @ 30% payable in terms of sub-section (2) is also to be paid on the amount so determined under sub-section (1A). Both these sub-sections are independent and deal with different situations. Compensation paid under sub-section (1A) is independent and dehors of any amount of compensation which may be determined under sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the Act. No solatium @ 30% is payable on the additional amount @ 12% per annum awarded under sub-section (1A) of Section 23 of the Act. 7. In view of the aforesaid discussions, present appeal needs to be allowed and as such the impugned award dated 26.12.2012 is modified to the extent that the claimants shall not be entitled to the amount of solatium @ 30% so paid under sub-section (2) on the additional compensation so awarded under Section 23 (1A) of Section 23 of the Act. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. CMP No. 4772 of 2016 8. Learned counsel for the applicants seeks permission to withdraw the present application with liberty to file the same afresh. Liberty granted. Application stands disposed of accordingly.