IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.324 of 2011 Date of decision: 25.1.2011 Satish Kumar and others …..Petitioners versus Land Acquisition Tribunal, Improvement Trust, Phagwara and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr.Hitesh Kaplish, Advocate for the petitioners Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to modify an Award dated 16.3.1009(P4), pronounced by a Tribunal constituted under Section 60 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (in short, the Act). As per facts on record, land of the petitioners was acquired by issuing a notification under Section 36 of the Act on 1.8.1975. After disposal of objections filed by the land owners and on approval of the Scheme, notification under Section 42 of the Act was issued on 27.10.1976. Award was pronounced on 27.1.1977. The Collector divided the area under acquisition into five blocks and accordingly, the compensation was awarded at different rates for each block. On applications moved under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the land owners, matter went to the Tribunal and vide award dated 5.5.1987, prayer of the land owners, to enhance compensation was accepted. The Improvement Trust – respondent Civil Writ Petition No.324 of 2011 No.1 came to this Court by filing CWP No.1340 of 1988, which was allowed on 10.8.2007, award passed by the Tribunal on 5.5.1987 was quashed and matter was remitted to the Tribunal to decide it afresh. Thereafter, the impugned award has been passed, granting compensation @ Rs.4100/- per marla for the entire land by treating it as one block. The land owners were also held entitled to get other statutory benefits. It is an admitted fact that the above said award was challenged by the Improvement Trust by filing CWP No.967 of 2010, which was dismissed by this Court on 5.2.2010, by observing as under:- “ Mr. Hitesh Kapilish, learned counsel for the caveator, however has submitted that the distance between the land situated in village Chachoki and the acquired land is 3 kms. and that the aforesaid fact has been conceded by Shri L.M.Chopra, learned counsel for the petitioner- trust as is evident from para 78 of the award. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that the claimant- respondents were awarded a very meager sum by the Collector and there has been unnecessary litigation since 1977. The writ petitions filed in the years 1987, 1988, 1990 and 1991 were allowed by issuance of directions on 10.8.2007 (P.3). Any changed compensation would not still give adequate value to the landowners because what a rupee could purchase in 1975 may not be available for Rs. 50/- today. Once it is conceded that in respect of the land situated at village Chachoki the rate of compensation awarded is Rs. 3500/- per acre, it is not 2 Civil Writ Petition No.324 of 2011 improbable that the land situated within the municipal limits would fetch much higher price especially when it is realized that the land is situated on two sides of the National Highway and is surrounded by highly developed area which have the General Post Office, Court Complex, PWD Rest House, Sr. Secondary School, Grain Market etc. On the one side of the land there is a Phagwara-Chandigarh road and on the other side of it there is a Phagwara -Ludhiana road which are National Highways. The entire area has been found to be commercial in nature on the basis of evidence on record like site plan R.6 and the statement of various witnesses. Therefore, we are of the considered view that compensation has been assessed fairly which is more akin to the market value prevalent on 1.8.1975 at the time of issuance of notification under Section 36 of the Act. Accordingly we do not find any worthwhile ground to admit these petitions. The writ petitions fail and the same are dismissed.” (Emphasis supplied) It is apparent from the record that Mr.Hitesh Kaplish, Advocate, through whom, this writ petition has been filed, had put in appearance before the Division Bench in that case, as a Caveator and argued the matter. It was found by this Court that the compensation awarded, is fair and justified. Writ petition filed by the Improvement Trust was dismissed. At the time of arguments, Mr.Kaplish has tried to impress upon us that the acquired land had potential to develop it for commercial and residential activities. 3 Civil Writ Petition No.324 of 2011 Be that as it may, this aspect was considered by the Land Acquisition Tribunal and taking note of the same, compensation was enhanced many folds, by taking note of a sale instance, vide which nearby land falling in village Chachoki was sold. There is nothing on record to show that the said land was situated at a distance from the land under acquisition. At the time of arguments, counsel for the petitioners has failed to deny a fact that the land of village Chachoki is situated at a distance of 500 yards from the land, in dispute. No evidence on record, which may have been ignored by the Tribunal, when the impugned order was passed, has been brought to our notice. No case is made out to enhance the compensation. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 25.01.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) gk Judge 4