RFA No. 4014 of 2008 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 23.9.2010 1. RFA No. 4014 of 2008 (O&M) District Board ..... Appellant vs Siri Bhagwan and others ..... Respondents 2. RFA No. 4015 of 2008 (O&M) District Board ..... Appellant vs Duli Chand and others ..... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Hari Pal Verma, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of the aforesaid appeals as the same arise out of common acquisition. District Board (now Zila Parishad), Gurgaon, is in appeal before this court claiming apportionment of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 30.4.1994 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired land situated within the revenue estate of village Manesar, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, for establishing Institute of Media and Technology, Gurgaon. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed compensation for the acquired land. However, as there were wrong entries in the revenue record, the compensation was not paid to the private respondents as the same was objected to by the appellant Board, which resulted into filing of petition under Section 30 of the Act. The learned court below vide award dated 1.12.2007 allowed the claim of the private respondents herein and they were held entitled to compensation for the acquired land and the claim of the appellant (District Board) Zila Parishad, was rejected. The learned court below having rejected the plea raised by the District Board Zila Parishad, the same is before this court. Learned counsel for the submitted that about 90 years earlier Zila Parishad had constructed a Bandh on the acquired land at its own cost and is maintaining the same since then and on account of this fact they have some right and interest in the land and on account of which they are entitled to apportionment of compensation. RFA No. 4014 of 2008 (2) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is a case in which an agency of the State is trying to claim apportionment of compensation merely because at some stage the landowners permitted it to use their land for the benefits of the community in large for raising Bandh without pressing for compensation otherwise the landowners were entitled to get compensation for use of land by the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. It is a unique case where an agency of the State is claiming apportionment of compensation for the land in its possession for about 90 years on which they had raised a bandh at the cost of the State. It was stated that the Bandh was raised to protect the village from flood water. The land on which the bandh was raised was neither acquired nor any compensation was paid to the landowners for its use. Merely because an agency of the State had used the land of the landowners for the welfare of the residents of the village, it would not entitle that agency to claim that land having been acquired subsequently they are entitled to apportionment of compensation as some right had accrued in their favour merely on account of the fact that they had been permitted by the landowners to raise Bandh thereon. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. 23.9.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge