Civil Revision No.115 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.115 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision 17.01.2011 State of Haryana and another ...... Petitioners VERSUS Fateh Singh and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Sukant Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, for the petitioners. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: The petitioners have invoked the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned order dated 08.12.2010, passed by the Addl. District Judge, Panipat, Having perused the impugned order, it transpires that as per Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, on making an award under Section 11, the Collector shall tender the payment of compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award, and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub section. In this case, though there was a dispute with regard to the apportionment yet the petitioners were bound to tender the payment and deposit the same in the Court, so long as the question with regard to entitlement is not raised. Section 34 further makes it clear that when the amount of such compensation is not paid or deposited before taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with Civil Revision No.115 of 2011 (O&M) 2 interest thereon @ 9% per annum from the time of so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited. It has rightly been observed by the Executing Court that had this amount been tendered in the Court then the Court could keep the said amount in some nationalized bank so that it could incur interest. But that was not so done. As such, the objection petition was rightly declined and the petitioners were rightly held liable to make the payment of interest. Dismissed. It may be made it clear that the amount was not deposited in the Court due to the negligence on the part of the defaulting officer/officials of the petitioners, therefore, the petitioners-State of Haryana are directed to fix the responsibility of the defaulting officers/officials and to proceed further against him/them. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 17.01.2011 mamta-II