JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. The instant Regular First Appeal stands preferred by the appellants herein against the award rendered on 31.05.2003 by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the lands of the respondents herein comprised in Khasra No.5379, measuring 7-16 bighas, situated in Mauza Averi, Tehsil Nirmand, District Kullu, H.P. stood acquired for defence purposes. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award No.1/98 of 19.3.1998 determined diverse rates qua market value for diverse categories of lands whereupon he concomitantly determined diverse rates of compensation amount qua diverse categories of lands brought to acquisition. 3. The award of the Land Acquisition Collector was subjected to impeachment by way of the land holders/land owners preferring a reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P. In the impugned award, the learned District Judge, on a consideration of the material as laid before him, had enhanced the compensation amount qua the land subjected to acquisition. The learned District Judge, in his impugned award has come to enhance the market value of the acquired land to Rs.60,000/- per bigha irrespective of the classification of lands brought to acquisition. 4. The appellant herein/respondent before the learned Court below, stands aggrieved by the Award rendered by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur Civil Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P. and consequently, by way of the present appeal laid before this Court has, hence, challenged the impugned award. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the parties have been heard at length. 6. The learned District Judge while pronouncing the award in land reference petition No. 42 of 2000 wherefrom the instant appeal has arisen had as displayed by an incisive perusal of the relevant rendition also as evincible from the evidence as exists hereat meted reverence to all the relevant factors enjoined to be borne in mind whereupon, he allowed the reference petition preferred there-before by the aggrieved landowners wherein they assailed the insufficiency of the compensation amount as assessed qua their lands by the Land Acquisition Collector. Moreover, in the learned District Judge meteing deference to the relevant evidentiary material while assessing compensation qua the lands of the aggrieved land owners he has not wandered astray from the trite principles of law. 7. Moreover, in the learned District Judge meteing deference to the relevant evidentiary material while assessing compensation qua the lands of the aggrieved land owners he has not wandered astray from the trite principles of law. 7. The reliance as placed by the learned Reference Court upon the relevant material in display of the lands of the landowners as brought to acquisition holding the monetary value as enumerated therein does not suffer from any fallacy arising from his infracting the relevant parameters held in judicial pronouncements qua the relevant material as stood relied upon holding vis-à-vis the lands brought to acquisition (a) proximity from time angle and (b) proximity from location angle. Consequently, the reliance as stood placed by the learned District Judge on the relevant material pronouncing upon the market value borne by the land of the landowners brought to acquisition does not suffer from any inherent fallacy. 8. The learned District Judge had interfered with the award rendered by the learned Land Acquisition Collector wherein he had assessed varying rates of compensation qua contra district categories of land. Contrarily, the learned District had assessed a uniform rate of compensation amount qua diverse categories of land. In the learned District Judge assessing a uniform rate of compensation qua diverse categories of land hence his proceeding to set aside the award of the Land Acquisition Collector concerned who had assessed diverse rates of compensation for contra distinct categories of land, he had anvilled his relevant assessment upon a verdict of this Court rendered in a case titled as Gulabi v. State, AIR 1998 HP (DB) wherein it is mandated qua uniform rate of compensation being assessable qua lands brought to acquisition irrespective of their varying classifications, conspicuously when the purpose qua the lands as stand brought to acquisition is common to each category of land. In aftermath, when the purpose for acquiring the lands of the land owners is common to varying categories of lands hence contra distinctivity in their respective classification also the contra distinctivity in their monetary value pales into insignificance. In sequel, the assessment of a uniform rate of compensation for all categories of lands is both just and expedient. Consequently, the award of the learned District Judge assessing a uniform rate of compensation qua diverse categories of land does not suffer from any infirmity. 9. In sequel, the assessment of a uniform rate of compensation for all categories of lands is both just and expedient. Consequently, the award of the learned District Judge assessing a uniform rate of compensation qua diverse categories of land does not suffer from any infirmity. 9. In sequel, the instant appeal is dismissed and the award impugned here before is maintained and affirmed. All pending applications also stand disposed of.