RFA No. 3485 of 1992 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 3485 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision: 18.2.2010 State of Punjab and another .. Appellants v. Raghnath Singh and others .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Palvinder Singh, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ... Rajesh Bindal J. The State of Punjab is in appeal against the award of the learned Court below for reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the land owners for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 18.4.1984, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Punjab acquired the land measuring 14.77 acres, situated in the revenue estate of village Jagal, Tehsil Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur for remodelling of existing Dasuya-Langarpur Choe from RD No. 66000 to 69500. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') vide his award dated 18.9.1986, determined the market value of land at Rs. 8,800/- per acre for Barani land and Rs. 4,000/- per acre for Banjar Qadim, Gair Mumkin Rasta and Gair Mumkin Khad kinds of land. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of Barani land at Rs. 14,000/- per acre but upheld the award of the Collector for the remaining kinds of land. Considering the fact that the land in question was acquired way back on 18.4.1984, the Collector had determined the fair value of the acquired land at Rs. 8,800/- per acre, which was enhanced to Rs. 14,000/- per acre for Barani kind of land, whereas the award pertaining to Banjar Qadim, Gair Mumkin, khad etc. RFA No. 3485 of 1992 [2] was upheld at Rs. 4,000/- per acre and the present appeal is only one filed by the State, as learned counsel for the appellant had not been able to point out regarding factum of filing of any appeal in other case, the time gap and meager amount of compensation, which has already been paid to the land owners, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned award at this belated stage. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 18.2.2010 mk