RFA No. 435 of 2006 28.07.2009 Present: Mr. J. S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General for the appellants. Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for respondents No. 1, 2, 3, 4(a) to 4(e), 5 & 6. After the matter was heard for some time, it was brought to my notice that while passing the impugned award, neither the Court has assigned any reason for determining the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.6,50,000/- per bigha for category “Kuhal Awal” and Rs.2,00,000/- for category “Banjar Kadeem” nor has the Court below considered the evidence led by the claimants in support of their claim. The State has impugned the award dated 30.09.2005, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Solan, in Land Reference No.10-S/4 of 2003 titled as Santokh Singh and others vs. Land Acquisition Collector, Shimla and others. The claimants who have not filed any appeal have brought to my notice the material which admittedly stands ignored by the Court below. For the public purpose, namely ‘construction of Pump House Shalakana Drinking Water Scheme’ at Village Parag Shalakana, Tehsil and District Solan, H.P., land measuring 0-10 biswas (“Kuhal Awal”) and 0-6 biswas (“Banjar Kadeem”) was acquired by the State vide Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 23rd December, 1997. The Land Acquisition Collector passed his Award No. 17 of 2002, dated 13th September, 2002. Aggrieved of the same, the claimants filed Land Reference Petition and while making the award the learned Court below enhanced the market value of the acquired land even though the Collector had not determined the market value for the category of the land acquired by the State. Having perused the record and after hearing the arguments, I am of the considered view that the matter needs to be remanded back to the Court below; the reasons assigned by the Court below while arriving at its conclusion are not only wrong but are also not based on any material on record; the rates could not have been doubled as has been erroneously done by the Court below. Further, the Court has seriously erred in not taking the entire material placed on record by the claimants while arriving at its conclusion. There is no material on record on the basis of which the rates could have been doubled. Consequently, the impugned award dated 30.09.2005, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan, in Land Reference No. 10-S/4 of 2003, is set-aside. The reference petition is restored to its original number. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the Court below be directed to pass the award, afresh on the basis of material already placed on record. The Court below is directed to pass a reasoned award after hearing the parties, based on the material already placed on record and also the relevant law applicable. The parties are directed to appear before the Court on 1st September, 2009. The record be sent back immediately. The matter pertains to the year, 1997, it is expected of the Court below that it would decide the matter as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six months from 1st date of hearing. In view of the above observations, the appeal is disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol) Judge July 28, 2009 (rana)