IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.8602 of 2010(O&M) Date of decision: 10.03.2011 Improvement Trust, Hoshiarpur and another …..Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr.Rajeev Anand, Advocate for the petitioners Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) C.M. No.17161 of 2010 in / and CWP No.8602-2010 This application has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer that the writ petition be disposed of in terms of an order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Mala v. the State of Haryana and others, CWP No.20433 of 2009, decided on 17.8.2010. Application is accompanied by an affidavit of Chairman of the petitioner-Improvement Trust. The land under acquisition was situated in two villages. By filing this writ petition, the petitioners have laid challenge to an award passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, Improvement Trust at Hoshiarpur on 17.4.2003, awarding under-mentioned compensation to the land owners:- Name of village Kind of land Rates awarded by the Collector per marla Enhanced market rates assessed by the Court per marla Civil Writ Petition No.8602 of 2010(O&M) Purhira n Chahi Rs.668.75 Rs.1337.50 Remaining all kind of land Rs.687.50 Rs.1375.00 Sutehri All kind of land Rs.714.30 Rs.1428.60 The land owners were also held entitled to all statutory benefits available to them as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Against the above said award, the Improvement Trust- petitioner has filed many writ petition, including this petition. In the same manner, land owners also came to this Court with a prayer that the compensation granted to them be enhanced. Both sets of the writ petitions were decided vide the judgment passed in Mala’s case (supra). Writ petitions filed by the Improvement Trust – petitioners were dismissed, whereas the writ petitions filed by the land owners were allowed and the compensation was enhanced to Rs.2400/- per marla along with all statutory benefits. In view of a fact that the dispute in this writ petition is squarely covered by the ratio of judgment in Mala’s case (supra), this application is allowed, writ petition is taken on board for disposal and is dismissed accordingly. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 10.03.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) gk Judge 2