JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - All these appeals arising out of common award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'') by Additional District JudgeII, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as ''the Reference Court'') are being decided vide this common judgment as common question of facts and law is involved in these appeals. 2. Before Reference Court, Land References No. 15 R/4 of 2014/08, titled Ram Lal and others versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others; RBT65R/4 of 2014/08, titled Govind Singh and others versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others; and RBT22R/4 of 2014/08, titled Tara Devi versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others were decided together after recording evidence independently in each reference petition. 3. All these reference petitions were filed for enhancement of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as ''the Collector'') in Award No. 585, dated 18th July, 2007. 4. It is undisputed fact that the State of Himachal Pradesh has acquired land in Villages Hatkoti, Chamsu, Bharot, Mungranadal, Ghunsa, Chauri, etc. for construction of Sawra Kuddu Hydro Electric Project by issuing various notifications under Section 4 of the Act and the Collector had determined the amount of compensation by separate awards in every case arising out of particular notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in that case. First award passed by the Collector was Award No. 585, dated 18th July, 2007. 5. In Award No. 585, the Collector had classified the land in three categories and had determined the value of land of the said three categories as under: (i) Irrigated land : Rs.821.00 (per centiare) (ii) Unirrigated/cultivated land : Rs.509.00 per centiare (iii) Uncultivated land : Rs.161.00 6. The land owners had sought enhancement in the amount of compensation determined vide Award No. 585 by preferring reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act. Those reference petitions were decided by the Reference Court vide common award passed in Land Reference Petitions No. 53S/4 of 2013/08, titled Sh. Narayan Singh and others versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others, wherein the Reference Court had enhanced the compensation by determining the value of acquired land at the rate of Rs.3038/- per centiare. 7. Those reference petitions were decided by the Reference Court vide common award passed in Land Reference Petitions No. 53S/4 of 2013/08, titled Sh. Narayan Singh and others versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board and others, wherein the Reference Court had enhanced the compensation by determining the value of acquired land at the rate of Rs.3038/- per centiare. 7. The said award was assailed by the project proponent in RFA No. 368 of 2014, titled The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and another versus Narayan Singh and others, and its connected matters. This Court, allowing those appeals, i.e. RFA No. 368 of 2014 and its connected matters, has determined the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.2700/- per centiare with respect to the land of Village Hatkoti involved in Award No. 585 wherein notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 6th August, 2005 and was published lastly on 26th December, 2005. 8. In the present cases, land owners have mainly relied upon one year average for the year 20042005 w.e.f. September 2004 to 31st August, 2005 (which is Ext.PW7/A in RFA No. 368 of 2014), award No. 1 of 2006 dated 24.3.2006 (Ext.PW1/E in RFA No. 368 of 2014) and award dated 9.5.2014 passed by the Reference Court in land reference petition No. 53S/4 of 2013/08 titled Narayan Singh and others vs. The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited, which was the impugned award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector in appeal i.e. RFA No. 368 of 2014 and also is impugned in present appeals. 9. Project proponent has relied upon one year average for the year 20042005 w.e.f. 26th December, 2004 to 25th December, 2005 which is Ext.RW1/B in RFA No. 368 of 2014. 10. From the oral as well as documentary evidence on record, it is evident that the land owners as well as project proponent are banking upon the evidence led in the reference petitions, subject matter of RFA No. 368 of 2014 and its connected matters and the entire evidence relied upon by the parties, in present appeals, has already been considered in detail in RFA No. 368 of 2014 and connected matters. 11. In judgment, dated 12th October, 2018, passed in RFA No. 368 of 2014 and its connected matters, the cases were categorized by this Court in three categories, i.e. Lots ''A'', ''B'' and ''C''. 11. In judgment, dated 12th October, 2018, passed in RFA No. 368 of 2014 and its connected matters, the cases were categorized by this Court in three categories, i.e. Lots ''A'', ''B'' and ''C''. The cases of Village Hatkoti were classified as Lot ''A'' whereas in Lots ''B'' and ''C'', cases of other villages, wherein amount of compensation was determined by the Collector on the basis of award of Village Hatkoti, were included. In Lot ''B'', notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued in July, 2005,which was lastly published on 25th October, 2005 whereas in Lot ''C'', notification under Section 4 was issued three years later, in August, 2008. In present case, notification under Section 4 was issued on 6th August, 2005 leading to passing of award No. 585 dated 18.7.2007 by the Land Acquisition Collector and in appeals arising out of the same award, the amount of compensation has been determined in Lot A in RFA No. 368 of 2014. Therefore, present case is identical to the cases categorized as Lot ''A'' in RFA No. 368 of 2014 and its connected matters. 12. In view of above discussion, present set of appeals is squarely covered by judgment, dated 12th October, 2018, passed by this Court in RFA No. 368 of 2014, titled The Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and another versus Narayan Singh and others, and its connected matters and the same shall apply mutatis mutandi to the present cases. Therefore, the land owners, in present case, are also entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.2700/- per centiare alongwith consequential statutory benefits, in accordance with law, in terms of judgment, dated 12th October, 2018, passed in RFA No. 368 of 2014 (supra) and its connected matters.