RFA No.481 of 1989 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.481 of 1989 Date of decision 10.3.2010. State of Haryana and another versus Mool Chand CORAM : - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.C.PURI. Present : Mr. Himanshu Raj, AAG, Haryana. for the appellant. K.C.PURI. J. State of Haryana and Chief Engineer Irrigation have preferred this appeal against the Award passed by learned Additional District Judge, Narnaul. The facts of the case in brief are that the Govt. of Haryana, in pursuance of its notifications No. 12714/2-L of 2.10.80 under Section 401 of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (hereinafter called as the Act) and No.13937/2-L dated 17.12.80 under Section 6 of the Act decided to acquire 8-69 acres of land in village Kultajpur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mohindergarh, including the land of the present petition as detailed in the statement No.19 submitted with reference, at public expense, for public purpose namely for the construction of Hasanpur Distributory by the Irrigation Department consequent thereupon Sh. B.K. Sharma, Land RFA No.481 of 1989 2 Acquisition Collector, PWD (IB) Rohtak, conducted the acquisition proceedings and gave his award No. 238 dated 27.2.1981 vide which he assessed the prevalent market price of chahi land at Rs.15,000/- per acre and that of Barani at Rs.10,000/- per acre. The petitioner was accordingly paid compensation for their acquired land as detailed in the statement No.19 but he did not satisfy with the same and filed present petition before the LAC making request therein that the same be sent to the Court of law for fresh determination of market value of their acquired land alongwith his other claimants. Accordingly, the LAC sent the petition as reference under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of learned District Judge, Narnaul and subsequently, it was received in this Court by way of assignment. The case of the petitioners is as under:- That the acquisition proceedings have not carried out in accordance with rules that he was not given any opportunity of being heard before announcing award by the LAC that the acquired land has wrongly been treated as barani whereas it was chahi and its market price was not less than Rs.25,000/- per acre, that his unacquired land has been bifurcated due to the acquisition but no compensation is paid on this account and he is entitled to sum of Rs.17,000/- as compensation on this score, that damage was caused to standing crops but no compensation was paid and therefore, he is entitled to a sum of Rs.5,000/- on this count, that there were ten standing trees in the acquired land and he is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,000/- for the trees. On notice issued, the respondents appeared and filed written statement, contesting the same. It has been denied if the acquisition RFA No.481 of 1989 3 proceedings were not carried out in accordance with rules or that the petitioner was not given any opportunity of being heard. It has also been denied if the acquired land was chahi and its market price was not given any opportunity of being heard. It has also been denied if the acquired land was chahi and its market price was not less than Rs.25,000/- per acre, rather it has been asserted that the petitioner has been paid compensation for his acquired land according to the rates prevailing in the locality. Rest of the claims of the petitioner have also been refuted and the dismissal of the petition has been sought. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed:- 1. What was the market value of the acquired land at the time of notification u/s 4&6 of the L.A. Act. 2. Relief. Both the parties have been afforded free and fair opportunities to lead their respective evidence. Learned State counsel has submitted that the land belonging to respondent was Berani land. The Collector has assessed the market value of chahi land @ Rs.15000/- per acre whereas the market price of Berani land was assessed @ Rs.10,000/- per acre. The learned Additional District Judge has not considered the fact that land belonging to the respondent was berani land as such has wrongly given enhancement of Rs.5000/- per acre. I have carefully considered the said submission but do not find any force in that submission. The collector has assessed the prevalent market value of chahi RFA No.481 of 1989 4 land at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per acre and that of barani Rs.10,000/- per acre. The land measuring 8.69 acre was acquired in village Kultajpur, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mohindergarh, including the land in question for public purposes i.e. for construction of Hasanpur Distributory by Irrigation Department. From the perusal of Girdwari Ex.P-4, it is revealed that land in question was sown. So, in these circumstances, keeping in view the purpose of acquisition and keeping in view the fact that land is being sown so the distinction drawn by the Collector has rightly been ignored by the learned Additional District Judge. No further point has been argued before me. In view of the above circumstances, the appeal is without any merit and the same stands dismissed. A copy of this judgment be sent to the trial Court for strict compliance. ( K.C.PURI ) JUDGE March 10th, 2010 sv