CWP No.18950 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 18950 of 2007 Date of decision: 8.2.2011 Amarjit Singh and others ...Petitioner vs The President, Land Acquisition Tribunal and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG. --- Present: Mr.Akshay Bhan,Advocate, for the petitioners. Dr.Urmila Gupta, Advocate, for Improvement Trust. -- Jasbir Singh,J.(Oral) This order will dispose of civil writ petitions No.18563, 18139, 18617, 18950 of 2007, 249 and 6081 of 2008 involving similar questions of facts and law. To dictate order, the facts are being taken from CWP No.18950 of 2007. These writ petitions have been preferred by the petitioners (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimants') whose lands was acquired by the Amritsar Improvement Trust, challenging an award dated 22.12.2005 passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal'), by claiming enhanced compensation. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Amritsar Improvement Trust (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Improvement Trust’) framed a development scheme known as ‘Development Scheme for Ajnala Road CWP No.18950 of 2007 2 area’under Section 24 read with Section 28(2) of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Improvement Act’) for an area measuring 323 acres, situated beyond the municipal limits, but within the local area of the Improvement Trust. A notification under Section 36 of the Act was issued on 21.01.1972, which corresponds to Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Acquisition Act’). The State Government considered the scheme, as submitted by the Improvement Trust and sanctioned the same. A notification under Section 41 of the Act was issued on 18.12.1972. The detail and location of the land was also notified therein. The Claimants, whose lands fell in that Scheme, filed their objections before the Land Acquisition Collector. On consideration of the same, the Land Acquisition Collector passed an Award on 03.10.1973. Rs. 8 per sq. yd. was granted for the land situated on the Circular Road, falling in belt ‘A’ and Rs. 2.50 per sq. yd. for the land situated in belt ‘B’. The compensation was also granted for the trees and super structures thereon. The claim for solatium was rejected. The Claimants feeling aggrieved by the Award, passed by the Collector, preferred an application under Section 18 of the Acquisition Act before the Tribunal, constituted under the Improvement Act, for enhancement of compensation. The reference was instituted on 02.05.1974, which culminated in the passing of the Award dated 22.12.2005 by the Tribunal. Vide this Award, the market value of the land at the time of acquisition was assessed at Rs. 12 per sq. yd. The benefits of the amended provisions of Section 23(2) and Section 28 of the Acquisition Act was also granted to the Claimants. Belting by the Collector was not accepted and the entire acquired land was assessed at the CWP No.18950 of 2007 3 same uniform rate. It is this Award dated 22.12.2005, passed by the Tribunal, which has been challenged by the Claimants before this Hon'ble Court. In this writ petition, it is prayed by the petitioners (claimants) for modification of the award (Annexure P1) and enhancement of the compensation. At the time of arguments counsel for the petitioners states that the case is squarely covered in favour of the petitioners by a Division Bench of this Court passed in the case of Dr.Jagdev Inder Singh v. The President, Land Acquisition Tribunal, Amritsar Improvement Trust, Amritsar and others, CWP No.7977 of 2006, decided on 6.10.2010. In the above said case the claimants were held entitled to a uniform compensation of Rs.18.50 per square yard in respect of the acquired land and they were also held entitled to all the statutory benefits as granted by the learned Tribunal. Counsel for the respondents has failed to say anything contrary to the aforesaid view taken in the above said judgment. In view of the above all the writ petitions are disposed of in the same terms as in Dr. Jagdev Inder Singh's case (supra). ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge. ( Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge February 8, 2011 rk