RFA No. 2370 of 2003 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 28.4.2009 RFA No. 2370 of 2003 (O&M) Jagan Ram and others ..... Appellants vs Punjab State ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Ms. Deepinder Kaur, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner has approached this court for further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 8.2.1990, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), Government of Punjab acquired 50 acres of land in village Rampura Phul for construction of New Grain Market at Rampura Phul. The same was followed by notification dated 28.1.1991, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') determined the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 49,315/- per acre for Nehri land; Rs. 38,874/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs. 1,04,115/- per acre for Gair Mumkin kind of land. Aggrieved against the award, the land owners filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinda, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, awarded compensation @ Rs. 225/- per square yards for the land underneath the shops and booths. He further determined the market value of the rest of the land @ Rs. 90,000/- per acre for Nehri and Chahi land and upheld the award of the Collector for Gair Mukin kind of land. Learned counsel for the parties do not dispute the fact that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment of this court in RFA No. 317 of 2004 Smt. Shanti Devi vs The Collector and others decided on 17.2.2009, whereby the appeals arising out of same acquisition were disposed of and the matters were remitted back to the reference court for fresh consideration. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in Smt. Shanti Devi's case (supra), the present appeal is accepted. The impugned award of learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda, is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Reference court for fresh consideration. RFA No. 2370 of 2003 2 The parties through their counsels are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Bathinda, on 23.5.2009. The learned District Judge may either keep the reference with himself or may entrust the same to any other Additional District Judge, who is dealing with the already remanded matters. 28.4.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge