RFA No. 2355 of 2011 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 2355 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 6.5.2011 The State of Haryana and others ...Appellants vs Anil Kumar and another ...Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal, J. This order shall dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2355 to 2365 of 2011, as common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals. By filing appeals, State of Haryana is seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land. The bunch of appeals pertain to the valuation of land acquired for construction of Shergarh-Guhana Link Channel from RD 15730 to 74700 off taking from RD 189989-Right Sirsa Branch for which notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') was issued by the State of Haryana on 12.5.2006. The land is situated within the revenue estate of village Chhot, Hadbast No. 18, Tehsil and District Kaithal. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 7.8.2006. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the Collector') vide award dated 20.3.2007 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre. The land owners being dissatisfied with the award of the Collector filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Court below assessed the compensation of the acquired land @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre. Aggrieved against the award of the learned court below, the State is in appeal before this court. RFA No. 2355 of 2011 (2) Learned counsel for the State submitted that the court below had not given any reasoning whatsoever while determining the amount of compensation payable for the acquired land. The evidence led by the State was totally ignored. He further argued that the value of the land of each area is different keeping in view the location and other advantages. But in the present case, the learned court below without there being any site plan produced on record showing the exact location of village Bhanpur and village Chhot in District Kaithal assessed the compensation for the acquired land. It had merely applied a thumb rule. It is due to the policy of the State Government that the value of the land was determined @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre by the Collector, otherwise the value of the land in the area was not as has been awarded by the learned court below. It was further submitted by the learned State counsel that the land owners have not led any evidence to show as to in what manner, they have suffered any loss on account of construction of distributory. Inspite of that the learned court below had wrongly awarded ` 50,000/- per acre to Jai Parkash etc., Ram Sarup etc., Krishan etc., Birbhan etc., Kuldeep etc. and Dharam Pal, etc. the landowners, on account of severance. The prayer was for setting aside of award of the learned court below and restoration of the Collector. Heard learned counsel State and perused the relevant referred record. As far as the evidence led by the State in the form of sale-deeds, Ex. R-1, Ex. R-2 and Ex. R-3, is concerned, the same has rightly been discarded by the learned court below because the price of land therein is less than the value assessed by the Collector. There is no dispute that Government had issued policies on 28.4.2005 and 6.4.2007 fixing minimum rates for awarding compensation for the acquired land. As per the policy of the State Government dated 6.4.2007, the minimum rates were fixed @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre in the area in question. This rate was applicable on all those acquisitions where awards have been announced by the Collector on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. The relevant extract of policy dated 6.4.2007, is as under:- "Sub: Fixation of floor rates for the acquisition of land for public RFA No. 2355 of 2011 (3) purpose in the State of Haryana. Ref: This Department Memo No. 2025-R-5-2005/4299, dated 28.4.2005. Vide this Department Memo. under reference, minimum floor rates for acquiring land for public purposes for various Departments as well as other State Agencies were fixed by the Haryana Government as follows: i) Minimum floor rate for urbanisable area of Gurgaon. Rs. 15.00 lacs per acre ii) Minimum floor rate for rest of the Haryana Sub-Region of NCR inlcuding Panchkula and area of Chandigarh periphery in the Haryana State. Rs.12.50 lacs per acre. iii) Minimum floor rate for the rest of the Haryana State. Rs. 05.00 lacs per acre. (These floor rates did not include the solatium and interest payable under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894). 2. Now it has been observed that with the passage of time market rates of the land have increased substantially. Therefore, Haryana Government has re-considered this matter and has decided to re-fix these floor rates as follows: i) Minimum floor rate for urbanisable area of Gurgaon. Rs. 20.00 lacs per acre ii) Minimum floor rate for rest of the Haryana Sub-Region of NCR inlcuding Panchkula and area of Chandigarh periphery in the Haryana State. Rs.16.00 lacs per acre. iii) Minimum floor rate for the rest of the Haryana State. Rs. 08.00 lacs per acre. 3. These floor rates do not include the solatium and interest payable under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 4. These revised rates will be applicable on all those acquisitions where awards have been announced on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894." As per the aforesaid letter dated 6.4.2007 the minimum floor rate RFA No. 2355 of 2011 (4) for the rest of the Haryana State was fixed @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre and the rates are applicable to all those acquisitions where awards have been announced on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In the present case, the award was announced by the Collector on 20.3.2007 just two days before the enforcement of policy dated 6.4.2007 which comes into force with effect on 22.3.2007. The aforesaid policy letter, in my opinion, can be considered as a piece of evidence for the reason that the process to frame or revise a policy starts in advance, finalisation thereof takes time. Considering the fact that the award in the present case was announced just two days before the enforcement of policy dated 6.4.2007, the value of the acquired land determined @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre cannot be faulted with. Even if there is some small difference, this court would not like to interfere in the matter. There is no force in the argument of learned counsel for the State regarding award of compensation on account of severance. No doubt, due to construction of canal/distributory it has become easier for the landowners to irrigate their field. But on the other hand, due to bifurcation of land it is difficult for them to cultivate two portions of land. In my opinion, considering the difficulties which are being faced by the landowners for the acquisition of this type, damages which have been awarded by the learned court below would be just and reasonable. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. Consequently, all the accompanying applications are also dismissed. However, it is made clear that dismissal of appeals filed by the State will not affect the merits of the appeal of the landowners, in case filed by them. The same shall be considered independently. 6.5.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge