JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. Since common questions of fact and law stand raised for consideration in all the appeals, hence they are taken up together for disposal. 2. The instant appeals stand directed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the impugned rendition recorded by the learned Reference Court whereby it in the amount constituted there within assessed compensation qua the lands of the respondents/landowners. The solitary contention addressed by the learned Additional Advocate General for unsettling the rendition recorded by the learned Reference Court stands hinged upon the factum qua with the respondents/landowners evidently entering into a consensual settlement with the appellants herein whereby they displayed their consent to receive the amount constituted therein as compensation amount assessable qua their lands as stood brought to acquisition thereupon the apt consensual settlements warranted an inference qua theirs there under waiving besides abandoning their entitlement to seek any levy of the statutory benefits contemplated in the Land Acquisition Act on the consensually settled compensation amount whereas in the impugned rendition the learned Reference Court levying statutory benefits on the consensually agreed/settled compensation amount qua the apposite lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition by the appellants herein warrants its standing quashed and set aside. 3. For determining the tenacity of the aforesaid submission addressed here before it is imperative to make an allusion to the apposite recitals manifested in the consensual statements respectively made/recorded by the landowners ( RW-3/D and Ex.RW-3/E in RFA No. 57 to 83 of 2013 (Ex. RW-5/D and Ex.RW-5/E in RFA Nos. 1,2,3,4 and 6 of 2013) with the authorities concerned where within the respondents/landowners display their acquiescence to receive 8 lacs per bigha as compensation for their lands as stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition. Significantly there within no vivid display occurs of the respondents/landowners while accepting a sum of Rs.8 lacs per bigha as compensation amount for their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition, theirs also making a palpable explicit communication therein qua the aforesaid consolidated sum of 8 lacs per bigha agreed by them to be the compensation amount qua their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition including also the statutory benefits levy-able thereon. In sequel the factum of non-occurrence therein with explicitly the aforesaid factum probandum does benumb the espousal of the learned Additional Advocate General qua with the landowners under the aforesaid statements communicating their acceptance qua Rs. 8 lacs constituting the compensation amount for their lands which stood thereat proposed to be brought to acquisition theirs also unveiling therein the apposite willingness qua the amount aforesaid also including therein all statutory benefits levy-able thereupon nor also he can hence argue qua the respondents/landowners waiving besides abandoning their statutory rights qua the relevant statutory benefits standing levied thereon by the learned Reference Court. 4. Be that as it may a perusal of the apposite reference transmitted for adjudication by the Land Acquisition Collector concerned to the learned Reference Court unfolds qua preceding the Land Acquisition Collector concerned recording his award qua the acquired lands of the respondents/landowners wherein he meted deference to the consensual settlements arrived at inter-se the respondents/landowners with the authorities concerned qua the relevant facet qua compensation amount assessable qua the lands of the respondents/landowners, his omitting to elicit the participation of respondents/landowners, sequel whereof is qua the consent award pronounced by the land Acquisition Collector concerned qua the lands of the respondents/landowners anvilled upon the relevant consensual settlement arrived inter-se them with the authorities concerned qua the relevant facet of compensation amount qua their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition, obviously hence standing vitiated with a stain of its infracting the rule of Audi alteram partem. Since the participation of the landowners in the proceedings preceding the pronouncement of an apposite award by the LAC concerned determining therein the compensation amount vis-à-vis the landowners concerned qua their lands which stood brought to acquisition would have facilitated emergence of the trite fact qua theirs while recording their respective consensual settlements with the authorities concerned qua the compensation amount manifested in their respective consensual statements to stand constituted in a sum of Rs. 8 lacs per bigha, theirs, while agreeing qua Rs.8 lacs per bigha constituting the sum of compensation assessable qua their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition, theirs also thereby acquiescing qua the amount aforesaid including also there within all the statutory benefits levyable thereon. 5. 8 lacs per bigha, theirs, while agreeing qua Rs.8 lacs per bigha constituting the sum of compensation assessable qua their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition, theirs also thereby acquiescing qua the amount aforesaid including also there within all the statutory benefits levyable thereon. 5. As afore-stated with the apposite consensual statements recorded by the landowners with the authorities concerned omitting to make an explicit disclosure therein qua the respondents/landlords while accepting Rs.8 lacs as compensation amount qua their lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition theirs also making a candid disclosure therein qua the aforesaid amount also including all the statutory benefits peremptorily levy-able thereon whereupon this Court has erected an inference qua hence the plain language of their consensual statements not purveying any leverage to any construction standing made thereupon qua the respondents/landowners waiving their entitlement to seek levy of statutory benefits thereon when stands construed with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector concerned for the reasons afore-stated standing ingrained with a vice of his infracting the rule of Audi alteram partem begets a formidable inference of the respondents/landowners not abandoning their rights to seek levy of statutory benefits on the compensation amount which stood consensually agreed by them to be constituted in a sum of Rs. 8 lacs per bigha. 6. Even otherwise all the statutory benefits levyable on the judicially determined compensation amount are imperatively levyable thereon. Significantly when the levying of statutory benefits even on compensation amount determined by the Land Acquisition Collector besides judicially determined by the learned Reference Court spurs from a peremptory/mandatory dictate of the apposite statutory provisions, similarly with the respondents/landowners while consensually agreeing qua Rs. 8 lacs per bigha comprising the relevant compensation amount qua theirs lands which stood proposed thereat to be brought to acquisition rendered the levying thereon of all the apposite statutory benefits to be their statutory entitlement. In aftermath with the levying of the apposite statutory benefits on the compensation amount being hence an inflexible statutory fiat peremptoriness whereof holding application even on the relevant compensation amount which stood consensually agreed to be received by the respondent landowners qua their respective lands, thereupon the levying thereon of the peremptory statutory benefits was an unrelenting statutory exercise. 7. In aftermath with the levying of the apposite statutory benefits on the compensation amount being hence an inflexible statutory fiat peremptoriness whereof holding application even on the relevant compensation amount which stood consensually agreed to be received by the respondent landowners qua their respective lands, thereupon the levying thereon of the peremptory statutory benefits was an unrelenting statutory exercise. 7. In aftermath no waiver can stand fastened upon the landowners qua the relevant consensual compensation amount not thereon begetting any levy of all the relevant statutory benefits nor the fiat of the principle of waiver or estoppel is workable qua any compensation amount consensually agreed to be received by the respondents/landowners unless cogent evidence stood displayed qua theirs with explicitly in the relevant writings marking the fact qua the consensually agreed relevant figure of compensation amount also including there within the statutory benefits whereas with the relevant echoings occurring in the relevant statements(s) not explicitly marking the aforesaid factum, the apposite conclusion there from reiteratedly is qua the respondents/landowners neither waiving their entitlement to seek levy of statutory benefits, on the consensually agreed compensation amount nor also they can stand estopped to claim levy thereon of the relevant statutory benefits. 8. Consequently there is no infirmity in the impugned awards. The present appeals stand dismissed. Impugned awards stand maintained and affirmed. All pending applications are disposed of accordingly. The Registry is directed to place photocopies of this judgment on each file of the connected matters.