R. F. A No. 2579 of 2004 (1) IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 2579 of 2004 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.12.2011 Raj Kumar Singh and others ... Appellants vs State of Haryana .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Jayender Singh Chandail, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Amandeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowners have approached this court seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 26.6.1989, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana sought to acquire land in the revenue estate of Village Ramgarh, Hadbast No. 232, Tehsil and District Panchkula (the then District Ambala), for development and utilisation thereof as residential, commercial and Industrial area in Urban Estate Panchkula. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 25.6.1990. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the different kinds of land at different rates. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below, determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 3,50,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned before this court. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that Cross appeal bearing RFA No. 2299 of 2004 State of Haryana vs Sh. Raj Kumar and others filed by the State challenging the same award against the appellants R. F. A No. 2579 of 2004 (2) was decided and the matter was remitted back to the learned court below vide detailed judgment in RFA No. 1660 of 2000 State of Haryana and another vs Smt. Harnami and others decided on 28.4.2010, by following the judgment in RFA No. 1281 of 1999– Gurdev Singh and others vs State of Haryana decided on 27.10.2006. The remitted reference is pending for 10.1.2012 before the learned court below. The aforesaid facts are not disputed by learned counsel for the State. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and following the aforesaid judgments, the impugned award of the learned court below is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court below for fresh consideration. The parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Panchkula, on 10.1.2012. The learned District Judge is directed to tag the present case along with the cases already remanded back. The appeal stands disposed of. 23.12.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge