CWP No.19784 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 19784 of 2009(O&M) Date of decision 5 .4.2010 Sukhpal Kaur ... Petitioner Versus Improvement Trust, Bathinda and another ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. K.S.Sidhu ,Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Namit Kumar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of direction to the Land Acquisition Collector, Improvement Trust, Bathinda to redetermine her claim for compensation of her acquired land under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act'). It has remained undisputed that land measuring 1 kanal comprised in khasra No. 2387 min, Khewat Khatouni No. 753/3151 was acquired by the Improvement Trust, Bhatinda for 49.57 Acre Scheme. The award was announced on 29.8.1996. The petitioner did not file any reference under Section 18 of the Act. However, some other land owners had sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and the Tribunal enhanced the awarded amount vide order dated 11.6.2002. The petitioner is claimed to have filed an application under Section 28 A of the Act on 5.9.2002 before the Land Acquisition Collector for redetermination of her claim at par which those who have been granted enhancement. It is appropriate to mention that the award passed by the Tribunal has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 3.3.2009 passed in CWP No. 15326 of 2002 (Bhikam Singh and another v. The District Judge, Bathinda and others) alongwith many other petitions. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2 the broad factual position has been accepted. However, it is claimed that the judgement delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in Bhikam CWP No.19784 of 2009 2 Singh's case (supra) upholding the order dated 11.6.2002 passed by the Tribunal has been challenged before Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition. We have heard learned counsel and are of the view that the writ petition deserves to be allowed. The petitioner is entitled to redetermination of the amount of compensation as enhanced by the Tribunal-cum-District Judge vide order dated 11.6.2002 which has been upheld by this Court in Bhikam Singh's case (supra) as the writ petitions filed by the claimants have been dismissed. It is not required to be emphasized that Section 28 A of the Act confers a right of redetermination on a land owner who has not sought reference under Section 18 of the Act to seek redetermination at par with those who have succeeded in getting the compensation enhanced. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Respondent no.2 is directed to redetermine the amount in accordance with the order dated 11.6.2002 passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Bhatinda n which has been upheld by this Court in Bhikam Singh's case (supra) The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jitendra Chauhan) 5.4.2010 Judge okg