Civil Writ Petition No. 18176 of 1998 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No. 18176 of 1998 Date of decision : 30.10.2008 Balwinder Singh and another ..... Petitioners vs Special Land Acquisition Collector, Jalandhar and others ... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the petitioners. Mr. O. P. Dabla, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to decide the application filed by the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'). Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 27.8.1974, issued under Section 4 of the Act, the respondents acquired land situated in the revenue estate of Village Qilla Nau, Tehsil and District Faridkot, for public purpose namely for establishment of Military Cantonment. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land as under:- (i) Nehri Rs. 10,000/- per acre (ii) Chahi Rs. 10,000/- per acre (iii) Chahi Nehri Rs. 10,000/- per acre (iv) Barani Rs. 6,000/- per acre (v) Gair Mumkin Rs. 3,000/- per acre As on a reference made by the Land Acquisition Collector, on the objections raised by some landowners to the award of the Collector, the learned Additional District Judge enhanced the value of the acquired land vide award dated 29.2.1992. The petitioners vide application dated 28.4.1992 filed under section 28-A of the Act, registered at Sr. No. 622 on 29.4.1992, requested the Collector to re-determine the amount of compensation payable to them on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the court. Even a reminder thereto was also sent. However, no Civil Writ Petition No. 18176 of 1998 2 action was taken thereon. Thereafter, the present writ petition came to be filed seeking direction to the Land Acquisition Collector to decide the application under Section 28-A of the Act. In the written statement, the stand of the respondents is that as the appeals filed by the State against the award of the learned Additional District Judge were pending before this court and in terms of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Babua Ram and others vs State of UP and another JT 1994 (7) 377, the same could not be decided as the award sought to be relied upon is still under judicial scrutiny in appeal filed by the respondents. The present writ petition was listed along with other connected appeals arising out of same acquisition vide which the land pertaining to the petitioners was also acquired. In those appeals, the amount of compensation payable to the landowners has been further enhanced. Meaning thereby that the amount of compensation as determined by the court below has not been reduced and the reason for which the award of the learned Additional District Judge was not implemented by the Collector for the purpose of determination of fair value of the land belonging to the petitioners, on an application filed under Section 28-A of the Act, does not survive any more, with the decision of the appeals by this court. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to decide the application filed by the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Act, after notice to them in accordance with law. The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this court. The writ petition stands disposed of. 30.10.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge