R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: December 01, 2008 1) CM No.8117-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4162 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 2) CM No.8121-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4163 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 3) CM No.8125-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4164 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [2] 4) CM No.8129-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4165 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 5) CM No.8133-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4166 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 6) CM No.8137-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4167 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 7) CM No.8141-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4168 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [3] 8) CM No.8145-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4169 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 9) CM No.8149-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4170 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 10) CM No.8153-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4171 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 11) CM No.8157-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4172 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [4] 12) CM No.8161-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4173 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 13) CM No.8165-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4174 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 14) CM No.8169-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4175 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 15) CM No.8173-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4176 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [5] 16) CM No.8177-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4177 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 17) CM No.8181-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4178 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 18) CM No.8185-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4179 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 19) CM No.8189-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4180 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [6] 20) CM No.8193-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4181 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 21) CM No.8197-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4182 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 22) CM No.8201-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4183 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 23) CM No.8205-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4184 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [7] 24) CM No.8209-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4185 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 25) CM No.8213-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4186 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 26) CM No.8217-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4187 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 27) CM No.8221-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4188 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [8] 28) CM No.8225-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4189 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 29) CM No.8229-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4190 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 30) CM No.8233-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4191 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 31) CM No.8237-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4192 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [9] 32) CM No.8241-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4193 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 33) CM No.8245-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4194 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 34) CM No.8249-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4195 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 35) CM No.8253-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4196 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [10] 36) CM No.8257-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4197 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 37) CM No.8261-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4198 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents 38) CM No.8265-CI of 2007 and RFA No.4199 of 2007 (O&M) Punjab State Agriculture Marketing Board and another ..... Appellants Versus The Collector and others ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate for the applicants-appellants. Mr. B.B.S. Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the State. Mr. S. K. Singla, Mr. Mandeep K. Sajjan, Mr. Mani Ram Verma, Advocates for the land owners. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of a bunch of above mentioned 38 applications filed by the applicants-appellants under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [11] of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as respondents in the land reference decided by the court below and further for permission to file appeal against the same to this Court, as common questions of law and fact are involved. The facts have been noticed from application in R.F.A. No.4162 of 2007. The Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board (for short, `the Marketing Board') and Market Committee, Talwandi Bhai have filed the present application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure with permission to implead them as necessary party, i.e., respondents No.3 and 4 respectively in the main award dated 1.12.1998 of the learned Reference Court in land acquisition proceedings, which is sought to be impugned before this Court. Along with the appeal, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 3144 days in filing the appeal has also been filed. On 22.1.2008, notice in the application for condonation of delay and application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure was issued. Learned counsel for the applicants-appellants submitted that 79 acres 5 kanals and 3 marlas of land was acquired by the State on behalf of Marketing Board for setting up a New Grain Market at Talwandi Bhai, District Ferozepur. The prayer in the application for being impleaded in the award of the Reference Court, which was decided on 1.12.1998, was made with the following averments: “(2) That brief facts leading to the present controversy are that 79 acres 5 kanals 3 marlas of land acquired by the Government on behalf of the appellant Board for setting up a New Grain Market at Talwandi Bhai, District Ferozepur. The Collector after considering the relevant points raised by the parties passed a well reasoned award dated 2.6.1988 under Section 11 of the Act and granted Rs. 40,000/- per acre for the acquired land. The Addl. District Judge, Ferozepur on reference made u/s 18 of the Act enhanced the compensation amount to whooping Rs. 4,60,000/- per acre, i.e., nearly Rs. 12 times per acre for the land in the first belt abutting the main road upto 1 killa depth, which is on an extremely higher side. Further rest of the land has been assessed at a market value of Rs. 4.00 lacs besides all statutory benefits. Thus the compensation on account of acquired land has been granted by imaginations in an indiscriminate manner. The accompanying appeal is now being R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [12] filed by the applicant as the entire compensation amount is to be borne by the applicant-appellants. Even otherwise, the said Mandi has now been vested in the applicant-Board. (3) That neither the applicant was impleaded as party nor any notice of any proceedings was given to the applicant in the present case and thus in view of the above facts the applicant is adversely affected behind its back and the enhanced compensation amount shall lead to a huge financial burden on the exchequer of the Board which is a public institution. In view of law settled in UP Awas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Gyan Devi 1995(1) RRR 272, the applicant is fully entitled to file the present appeal by being impleaded as a necessary party.....(sic) Learned counsel for the applicants-appellants submitted that as the compensation for the acquired land has to be borne by the applicants-appellants, they are the necessary parties and in fact, they should have been impleaded as respondents in the reference proceedings, but the land owners having failed to implead them, they are now entitled to be impleaded as respondents in the award of the learned court below and consequently file appeal before this Court to impugn the award in which the learned Reference Court has increased the value of the acquired land to nearly 12 times as compared to the award of the Land Acquisition Collector. Reliance was placed upon a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Gyan Devi (dead) by L.Rs., 1995(1) RRR 272. On the other hand, learned counsel for the private respondents submitted that Marketing Board as well as Market Committee cannot be permitted to file appeal before this Court against the impugned award. They, in fact, were not necessary parties at the relevant time for the reason that at that time, the land in question was acquired by the State and even as per their own admission, the ownership of the area of Mandi was transferred to them in 2007. He further submitted that the State has already filed appeals against the impugned award some of being R.F.A. Nos. 699 to 724 of 2001. Relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in U.P.Awas Evam Vikas Parishad's case (supra), the submission that in case the State has already filed appeal impugning the award, the local authority, for whose benefit the land is acquired, can be impleaded as a party in the appeals filed by the State to defend the determination of compensation by the Land Acquisition Collector and oppose further enhancement of compensation. R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [13] Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for being impleaded as party in the reference already decided by the learned court below and also for permission to file appeal. A perusal of the contents of the application, as reproduced above, shows that all what is stated in the application is that the appeal is now sought to be filed as the entire compensation amount is to be borne by the applicant- appellant as the said Mandi has now been vested in the applicant-Board. However, when it was vested is not borne out from the application. It was further submitted that the applicants-appellants were not impleaded as party before the Reference Court nor any notice was given to them as they were not adversely affected at that time. The fact is that the award of the learned court below, which is sought to be impugned with permission to file appeal before this Court, is already under challenge by the State in the appeals filed by it. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in U. P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad's case (supra), while considering a similar issue, summed up the enunciation of law in the following terms: “(50) Section 50(2) of the L.A. Act confers on a local authority for whom land is being acquired a right to appear in the acquisition proceedings before the Collector and the reference court and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. (51) The said right carries with it the right to be given adequate notice by the Collector as well as the reference court before whom acquisition proceedings are pending of the date on which the matter of determination of compensation will be taken up. (52) The proviso to Section 50(2) only precludes a local authority from seeking a reference but it does not deprive the local authority which feels aggrieved by the determination of the amount of compensation by the Collector or by the reference court to invoke the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution as well as the remedies available under the L.A. Act. (53) In the event of denial of the right conferred by Section 50(2) on account of failure of the Collector to serve notice of the acquisition proceedings the local authority can invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [14] Constitution. (54) Even when notice has been served on the local authority the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution would be available to the local authority on grounds on which judicial review is permissible under Article 226. (55) The local authority is proper party in the proceedings before the reference court and is entitled to be impleaded as a party in those proceedings wherein it can defend the determination of the amount of compensation by the Collector and oppose enhancement of the said amount and also adduce evidence in that regard. (56) In the event of enhancement of the amount of compensation by the reference court if the Government does not file an appeal the local authority can file an appeal against the award in the High Court after obtaining leave of the Court. (57) In an appeal by the person having an interest in land seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference court the local authority should be impleaded as a party and is entitled to be served notice of the said appeal. This would apply to an appeal in the High Court as well as this Court. (58) Since a company for whom land is being acquired has the same right as a local authority under Section 50(2), whatever has been said with regard to a local authority would apply to a company too. (59) The matter which stand finally concluded will, however, not be re-opened.” A perusal of paragraph 55, as reproduced above, shows that local authority is a proper party in the proceedings before the Reference Court, where it is entitled to be impleaded as a party to defend the award of the Collector and oppose further enhancement. It can also lead evidence in defence. It is not disputed that before the Reference Court, the applicants-appellants never filed any application for being impleaded as party. As far as the facts of the present case, as stand today, the enunciation of law, as is evident from paragraphs 56 and 57, is relevant wherein it is held that in case of enhancement of compensation by the Reference Court in case the State does not file appeal, the local authority can file appeal against the award in the R.F.A. No. 4162 of 2007 [15] High Court after obtaining leave of the Court. It is further held that in case an appeal has been filed by a person seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, the local authority should be impleaded as party and has a right to be served with notice of appeal. In the present case, the undisputed fact is that the State has already filed appeals against the impugned award. Even the land owners have also come up in appeals seeking further enhancement of compensation. Both the set of appeals are admitted and pending consideration before this Court. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, the applicants cannot be permitted to file a separate appeal as the same has already been filed by the State against the impugned award in terms of paragraph 57 of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court, as referred to above. For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any merit in the present application. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Consequently, no further orders are required on application for condonation of delay and the appeal. Accordingly, the same are also dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge December 01 , 2008 mk