IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA RFA No. 320 of 2008 alongwith RFA No. 328 of 2008 Date of Decision : July 19, 2010 1. RFA No. 320 of 2008 Secretary (PWD) to the Govt. of H.P. and another Appellants Versus Chuhru Ram and another Respondents 2. RFA No. 328 of 2008 State of H.P. and another Appellants Versus Yashwant Singh and others Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellants : Mr. Ram Murti Bisht, Deputy Advocate General for the appellants. For the respondents : Mr. Tarlok Chauhan with Mr. Vijay Chaudhary, Advocate, for the respondents. Sanjay Karol, J. (Oral) There is no dispute that the present appeals are squarely covered by a decision dated 29.8.2007 rendered by this Court in RFA No. 136 of 2002, titled as State of H.P. & another versus Ram Lal & others and other connected matters. Copy of the decision is taken on record. Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. In Ram Lal (supra) this Court had modified the impugned award passed by the Court dealing with the land reference petition in the following terms:- “Accordingly, the award is modified to the extent that the respondents shall be entitled to the benefits u/s 28 only from the date of publication of the notification i.e. 7.9.1996 instead of 1.12.1989. The respondents shall also be entitled to the statutory interest as envisaged u/s 23 (1-A) of the Act from the date of publication of the notification dated 7.9.1996. Needless to add, the compensation, due and payable to the respondents, in accordance with law, has to be determined on the basis of the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court in Sunder (supra). All the appeals are disposed of accordingly.” 3. There is no dispute that in the instant cases land was acquired for the very same public purpose by way of very same land acquisition proceedings/notifications. 4. The present appellants, aggrieved of the common award passed by the Collector had also filed land reference petitions before the District Judge, Shimla. These petitions were separately adjudicated in terms of the impugned award dated 14.3.2008. The State had filed the appeals assailing the awards passed by the District Judge. The present appeals could not be decided earlier. They have to be decided in terms of the directions passed in Ram Lal (supra). 3 5. The impugned award is modified to the extent that the respondents shall be entitled to the benefits under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 only from the date of publication of the notification i.e. 7.9.1996 instead of 1.12.1989. Respondents shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits/interest in terms of Section 23(1-A) of the Act from the date of the publication of the notification. They shall also be entitled to the benefits of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sunder versus Union of India, 2001 (7) SCC 211. 6. With the aforesaid observations the present appeals stand disposed of. (Sanjay Karol), Judge. July 19, 2010 (PK)