JUDGMENT : RAJESH BINDAL, J. 1. Award passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Udhampur in a reference under Section 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, Svt. 1990 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been impugned by the present applicant/appellant by filing the present appeal. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking leave to appeal, as the applicant was not a party before the reference Court. The appeal is further accompanied by an application seeking condonation of 1,077 days' delay in filing the appeal. 2. Briefly, the facts as are evident from the award passed by the learned reference court are that the land of the present respondents was acquired vide Notification dated 05.09.1996 issued under Section 4(1) of the Act which was followed by Notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act, dated 11.02.1997. Award was announced by the Collector, Land Acquisition, Northern Railway, Udhampur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Collector'), on 23.09.1997. The land falls in village Gangera, Tehsil and District Udhampur. The purpose of acquisition was for construction of Udhampur-Katra Railway Line. As is evident from the award, 57 kanals of land was acquired. The compensation was assessed by the Collector at the following rates:- (i) Culturable Land Rs.25,000/- per kanal (ii) Banjar Land Rs.20,000/- per kanal (iii) Gair Mumkin Land Rs.15,000/- per kanal 3. Award was passed by the learned Reference Court on 31.12.2012. Present appeal was filed in this Court on 15.03.2016, after a delay of 1,077 days in filing thereof. 4. As far as the application for grant of leave to appeal filed by the applicant is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant being the beneficiary for acquisition of land, is liable to pay the compensation including the increased compensation. It has a right to be impleaded in the matter pertaining to determination of compensation. Hence, the application filed for leave to appeal should be allowed. 5. As far as the application, seeking condonation of delay of 1,077 days' in filing the appeal is concerned, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after the impugned award was passed by the learned Reference Court, the matter was taken up by the applicant with the Collector. Number of Communications were sent, requesting the Collector to file appeal against the award of the learned Reference Court, however, needful was not done. Number of Communications were sent, requesting the Collector to file appeal against the award of the learned Reference Court, however, needful was not done. Under these circumstances, the appellant had to take steps to file the appeal. In the process, delay of 1,077 days' occurred, which deserves to be condoned, as the applicant was not at fault. 6. As far as merits of the controversy is concerned, though leave to appeal is yet to be granted but still learned counsel sought to address some arguments on that to show prima facie merits in the case. He submitted that it is a case of no evidence led by the land owners. The land is on hilly terrain, where there was hardly any accessibility. Once there was no material produced on record before the learned court below, compensation could not be enhanced from Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 40,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 30,000/- per kanal for culturable land, Banjar Land and Gair Mumkin Land, respectively. Hence, there is merit in the appeal. The applicant had been unnecessarily burdened with huge amount of compensation, which otherwise is not payable to the land owners. The assessment made by the Collector was quite reasonable. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the land owners submitted that they were deprived of their land without payment of adequate compensation by the Collector, as a result of which they had to file objections. Same were referred to the learned court below, who assessed the compensation quite at reasonable rate. Though the land owners were entitled to further enhancement, but still they had not filed further appeal before this Court. The Collector never filed any appeal, as he also realized that the amount of the compensation assessed by the learned Reference Court was reasonable and the department got up after 1,077 days' delay to file the present application, seeking leave to appeal. There is no merit in the application. Leave to appeal does not deserve to be granted. There is no merit in the appeal as such. The applicant, if aggrieved, instead of corresponding with the Collector for years together, could have preferred the appeal itself at the very first instance, if they were so aggrieved of the award so passed. They had even deposited the amount of enhanced compensation, which had already been disbursed to the land owners. 8. The applicant, if aggrieved, instead of corresponding with the Collector for years together, could have preferred the appeal itself at the very first instance, if they were so aggrieved of the award so passed. They had even deposited the amount of enhanced compensation, which had already been disbursed to the land owners. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. 9. This is an application filed by the applicant, Indian Railways, seeking leave of this Court to file the appeal against the award of the Reference Court, whereby compensation has been assessed on account of acquisition of land for construction of Udhampur-Katra Railway Line. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 05.09.1996, which was followed by the Notification under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act on 11.02.1997. The Collector assessed the compensation for the acquired land vide his Award dated 23.09.1997; The amount of compensation assessed, was paid to the land owners. 10. A perusal of the award of the Collector shows that total of 57 kanals of land situated in village Gangera, Tehsil and District Udhampur was acquired. Before the Collector, the land owners stated that their land may be acquired, as it is required for public purpose, namely, for the construction of Udhampur-Katra Railway Line, however, they may be awarded the compensation at least @ Rs. 1,00,000/- per kanal, as the land in the adjoining village was being sold @ Rs. 4,00,000/- per kanal. Dissatisfied with the award, the land owners filed objections, which were referred to the court below. Appreciating the material produced on record, the learned court below vide award dated 31.12.2012 enhanced the compensation further and assessed the same at the following rates:- S. No. Land Compensation assessed by the Collector Enhanced compensation 1. Culturable Land Rs.25,000/- per kanal Rs.50,000/- per kanal 2. Banjar Land Rs.20,000/- per kanal Rs.40,000/- per kanal 3. Gair Mumkin Land Rs.15,000/- per kanal Rs.30,000/- per kanal 11. It has been recorded in the impugned award of the learned court below that the land owners involved herein were owners to the extent of 6 kanals and 10 marlas of land, whereas in some part of the land, where they claimed compensation, was Shamlat Deh. Gair Mumkin Land Rs.15,000/- per kanal Rs.30,000/- per kanal 11. It has been recorded in the impugned award of the learned court below that the land owners involved herein were owners to the extent of 6 kanals and 10 marlas of land, whereas in some part of the land, where they claimed compensation, was Shamlat Deh. There is nothing produced on record alongwith the application for leave to appeal as to what happened in the cases pertaining to other portion of land, as the acquisition was for 57 kanals of land, for which the award was passed by the Collector. 12. To Justify the delay, in filing the present appeal, the applicant submitted that the Collector did not take any steps to file the appeal despite repeated requests made by the Deputy Chief Engineer, Northern Railway, Udhampur. With reference to that, there are copies of the letters annexed with the application. The first one is dated 16.04.2013, where reference had been made to three cases titled as Lal Chand and others, Krishan Singh and others, and Om Parkash and others. The case in hand pertains to Lal Chand and others. The subsequent letter dated 05.06.2013 refers to only the case of the present respondents. There is another letter dated 20.09.2013 on record, which refers to six cases, where the appeals were required to be filed. Subsequent communications dated 17.01.2014 and 05.02.2015 refer to only five cases, where the appeals were to be filed. Thereafter, the communications dated 18.03.2015, 20.03.2015 and 27.03.2015 refer to only four cases. Subsequent communications dated 14.12.2016 and 21.12.2016 merely suggest filing of appeal in the case in hand. There is nothing mentioned regarding other cases. As to why the cases, where appeal was to be filed continued to increase or decrease in different communications, is not borne out from the record, nor it could be explained by learned counsel for the applicant. 13. From the aforesaid correspondence, it is evident that there were many cases decided by the Reference Court, assessing compensation at the same rate, as has been determined in case of the respondents, but no details had been furnished as to whether any appeal had been filed in those cases or not. Rather the latest communications sent for filing appeal contains the names of the present respondents only. That means no appeal was filed in other cases. 14. Rather the latest communications sent for filing appeal contains the names of the present respondents only. That means no appeal was filed in other cases. 14. The applicant cannot be permitted to choose to file appeal in the selected cases, where the challenge is to be made to assessment of compensation pertaining to land acquired vide same notification and the compensation assessed is at the same rates. Meaning thereby once the reward has been accepted qua one land owner in the same area, it cannot be discriminated qua the other land owners. 15. Still further, the Collector Land Acquisition is of Northern Railway, Udhampur. The officials/officers of the department had been corresponding him for filing appeal. Once the step to file application, seeking leave to appeal could be taken after 1,077 days, there is no good reason available on record to show that such an action could not be taken at the initial stage, when even the land owners had filed execution petition before the learned court below, seeking disbursement of compensation, which in fact has already been disbursed to them. Despite there being communication dated 14.12.2015 on record, even showing the calculation of compensation, as intimated by the Collector to the Deputy Chief Engineer, Northern Railway, Jammu, the amount of enhanced compensation, as determined by the Reference Court, the appeal was filed in this Court on 15.03.2016. 16. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find that any ground is made out to condone huge delay of 1,077 days in filing application for leave to appeal, hence, the same is dismissed. Consequently even the application seeking leave to appeal is also dismissed. 17. Before parting with the order, considering conduct of the applicant, this Court would like to make certain observations for streamlining the procedure for future. As has been noticed in the case in hand and also in the other cases, which are being filed in this Court, challenging the awards of the learned Reference Court in the cases assessing compensation on account of acquisition of land, the information regarding number of cases, which were decided by the Reference Court and filing or non-filing of appeals either by the land owners, seeking enhancement of compensation or by the department, which acquired the land, the details are not being furnished. As a result of which the cases pertaining to one acquisition remain separated and may be decided at different times, resulting in assessment of different compensation. Even before the court below as well, position seems to be similar. In some of the cases, it came to the notice that the addresses of the land owners are also not furnished properly by them. 18. To streamline the dealing of cases under the Act and with a view to ensure that there is no anomaly in assessment of compensation besides ensuring expeditious disposal of all the cases pertaining to one acquisition, this Court deems it appropriate to issue the following directions:- (1) The Land Acquisition Collector shall ensure that all the land owners who file objections furnish their complete addresses. (2) All the objections received by the Collector in land acquisition cases shall be referred to the court for adjudication maximum within three months after receipt thereof. Along with the objections or bunch of objections, a certificate shall be annexed by the Collector to the effect that all the objections received upto that date for the acquisition in question have been sent to the court. (3) Whenever a land reference is put up before the learned court below, to which it is entrusted, it shall ensure from the District Attorney/Assistant District Attorney and/or the Collector that all the objections received by the Collector upto that date have been sent to the court for adjudication. A certificate to the effect should be taken. In case the land references were received on different dates and were put up on different dates either for first hearing or for hearing after notice, the learned court below shall club all the land references arising out of the same acquisition to be heard on one date of hearing before it proceeds further in the matter. Assistance of the office of District Attorney is most relevant on this aspect. (4) In case some objections are received late by the Collector for any reason whatsoever, he shall be duty-bound to refer the same to the court immediately after its receipt so that the same is clubbed with the cases already pending and are disposed of along with that. Information about the cases already sent to the court shall also be furnished by the Collector. Information about the cases already sent to the court shall also be furnished by the Collector. (5) In case any objection is received after the disposal of earlier references by the learned Reference Court, the Collector while sending the same to the court for adjudication shall annex a copy of the award/judgment of the court along with that, pertaining to the acquisition in question. (6) The decision of the land references arising out of the same acquisition in piece-meal on different dates has to be avoided at all cost unless the reference is received late. (7) The learned courts below to keep in view the directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mangat Ram Tanwar & Anr. v. Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 1080 pertaining to disposal of land acquisition cases, which are extracted below:- "6. We are aware of the problem of back log in most of the Courts. The references under Section 18 should be treated as a class by themselves entitled to priority attention. If care and attention are devoted at the appropriate time, these cases can be easily disposed of by clubbing them group wise and recording evidence after taking the consent of counsel for the parties. Most of the acquisitions these days relate to large patches of land and ordinarily they are covered under one notification. Cases which are covered by a common notification should be clubbed together for which a statutory foundation is available in the Amending Act of 1984 in extending the benefit of higher compensation to all lands covered by a common notification even if dispute is not raised. If that is done the total number of cases where evidence would be necessary is likely to be reduced and better attention can perhaps be given. The High Courts should take special note of the pendency of land acquisition references and where it is possible a Court may be set apart for those cases. 7. We expect every reference Court to dispose of the references ordinarily within one year of receipt of the reference and the outer limit should be the end of the second year. The High Courts in exercise of their controlling powers should ensure enforcement of this position so that all pending references in the Subordinate Courts at the original stage may be disposed of within time frame indicated above. 8. The High Courts in exercise of their controlling powers should ensure enforcement of this position so that all pending references in the Subordinate Courts at the original stage may be disposed of within time frame indicated above. 8. The cases pertaining to acquisition of land for a canal/drain/road/channel/distributory or of similar nature, where the acquired land passes through different villages in the form of a strip, endeavour should always be made to entrust the cases to one court. Even if the same arise out of different notifications, though issued close in time, the learned courts below should also make efforts to decide these cases collectively after perusing site plan for the entire acquired land. It would be in the interest of all the parties concerned that a site plan showing location of the entire acquired land and also the surrounding area is produced by the State in court. The basic things, which should be brought on record to enable the court to determine fair value of the acquired land is the notification under Section 4 of the Act, copy of the award, site plan to the scale, showing the acquired boundary vis-a-vis. its location such as its closeness to the city, village, highway, internal road with all its positive and negative factors. Another important fact is that such a plan should have the status as on the date of issuance of notification under section 4 of the Act, the date being crucial for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land. It would be appropriate if the sale instances sought to be produced by the land owners or the State are pointed out on the site plan to be produced on record by either of the party. In the absence of which it is difficult to locate the same and consider its true value. The site plan, which should be taken on record, should be on butter paper or cloth, as it is seen in a number of cases that when the appeals are heard after 15-20 years, the site plans, which are quite big and may be on thin tracing paper, are torn out making it difficult for the parties to refer to the same and also for the court to consider. 9. 9. At the time of filing of appeals against the awards of the learned Reference Court pertaining to an acquisition, the Collector/Land Acquisition Officer shall file an affidavit that appeals against all the awards of the learned Reference Court pertaining to the particular acquisition, have been filed. 10. Wherever any appeal is filed against the award of the reference court, in which an earlier award pertaining to determinations of compensation has been relied upon, the status thereof should be mentioned in the appeal itself; namely, as to whether the aforesaid award was appealed against or not. 11. Wherever the land acquisition cases are pending in different districts, those be entrusted to one court for disposal." 19. A copy of the order passed by this Court be sent to the Chief Secretary of the State of Jammu and Kashmir for further reference to the department(s) concerned and be also circulated to all the Districts and Sessions Judges in the State for information and compliance.