IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 8325 of 2010 Date of Decision: May 17, 2010 Hardeep Kaur and others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. B.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of directions to the respondents to pass the award and make the payment of compensation along with interest in accordance with law for the land belonging to the petitioners. It is conceded position that a notification under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, ‘the Act’, dated 26.11.1998, was issued by the respondent State proposing to acquire land for a public purpose, namely, for construction of Dohak Minor R.D. 27868 to 30000/L side portion, in Tehsil and District Muktsar. On 27.11.1998, a declaration under C.W.P. No. 8325 of 2010 Section 6 read with Section 17 of the Act was made. The land belonging to the petitioners was also acquired in the aforesaid acquisition. It is conceded position that the notifications have lapsed because award in respect of the acquired land has not been passed. Notice of the petition was issued and Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, has put in appearance. After obtaining instructions from Sh. Rajeev Goel, SDO, Irrigation, Rajowala Canal Sub Division, Rajowala, District Faridkot, he has stated that fresh steps for issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act are being taken as the earlier notifications have lapsed. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the petitioners have been treated harshly by the respondents. Firstly, they are deprived of their land and then no compensation has been paid for their land for the last about 10 years. The notifications issued on 26.11.1998 and 27.11.1998, under Section 4 & 6 read with Section 17 of the Act, have been permitted to lapse. On an earlier occasion a similar petition titled as Gurdeep Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others (CWP No. 11041 of 2009, decided on 17.5.2010) came up for our consideration and we have issued the following directions:- “……In these circumstances, we accept the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and deem it just and appropriate to direct respondent Nos.2 & 3 to assess the damages in respect of the land of the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre per annum from the date of acquiring possession, i.e., 27.12.2001 upto 30.06.2010 and pay them the amount so calculated along with 9% 2 C.W.P. No. 8325 of 2010 interest. The needful shall be done within two months from today. However, damages beyond 30.06.2010 can be calculated and paid up from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and the compensation with regard to the acquisition of the land has to be paid if any notification under Section 4 of the Act is issued and the award is passed as per the rates given in the award. The petitioners are at liberty to file fresh petition if no acquisition proceedings are initiated by the respondents within 6 months from today.” Following the same reasoning, we direct the respondents to assess the damages in respect of the land of the petitioners utilised by them at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre per annum from the date of taking possession till 31.5.2010 and pay them the amount so calculated along with 9% interest. The needful shall be done within two months from today. However, damages beyond 31.05.2010 shall be calculated and paid till the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Thereafter compensation in respect of the land has to be paid as per law from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act as per the award to be passed and as per the rates given in the award. The petitioners are at liberty to file fresh petition if no acquisition proceedings are initiated by the respondents within 6 months from today. In view of the above, writ petition stands disposed of. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE 3 C.W.P. No. 8325 of 2010 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) May 17, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor 4