RFA Nos. 157 and 223 of 2003. 15.12.2009 Present: Mr. R.K.Bawa, Advocate General, with Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. AG, for the appellants. Mr. Shrawan Dogra, counsel for the respondents. Both these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment as they arise out of the same judgment of the learned Reference Court passed in 11 reference cases which were clubbed together and decided by a common judgment. The only point urged by the learned Advocate General is that the reference Court awards interest and additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter referred to as ‘the Act’) from the date of taking possession and not from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. This point is no longer res integra. In Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2002 (3) Shim. L.C. 45, dealing with the question of grant of additional compensation under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act, this Court held: “3……Therefore, in view of the ratio of above judgment it is finally settled that additional compensation under Section23(1-A) -2- of the Act is payable from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act and not from the date of taking actual possession up to the date of award or date of taking possession under the Act, whichever is earlier.” The same view has been reiterated by this Court in L.A.C. & another v. Avinder Singh, Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 891 on the question of additional compensation and interest to be awarded. This does not mean that the claimants – respondents can be left without any remedy. In Land Acquisition Officer vs. Hemangouda and others (2005) 12 SCC 443, the Supreme Court has also held down that the claimants shall be entitled to use and occupation, damages, mesne profits of the land taken over by the State without recourse to proceedings under the Act. These appeals are accordingly accepted and the following directions are issued: (i) the appeals are remanded to the Reference Court, i.e. the Court of learned District Judge, Bilaspur; (ii) On remand, the Reference Court will redetermine the compensation in accordance with the decision in Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition -3- Collector and others (2002 (3) Shim. L.C. 45); Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, (2002) 1 SCC 142) and R.L.Jain (D) by LRs. V. DDA and others (2004) 4 SCC 79) and Land Acquisition Officer vs. Hemangouda and others (2005) 12 SCC 443. (iii) The claimants will be at liberty to establish their claim for reimbursement of money/ compensation for use of their property by the State without recourse to proceedings under the Act. For this purpose, the claimants as well as the State would be free to adduce evidence in accordance with law. It is clarified that no other evidence except that which is necessary for determination of compensation for use of the land and deprivation of its use by the claimants by the State prior to notification under Section 4 of the Act will be allowed; (iv) Parties are directed to appear before the learned Reference Court on 11.1.2010. The Reference Court shall dispose of the matters within six months from the date on which parties first put in appearance before that Court. This direction is being issued keeping in view the -4- fact that the reference petitions were instituted in the year 2000. (v) The record be sent back forthwith. Learned Advocate General objects to the cases being remanded to the Reference Court for determination of use and occupation charges/ damages/ mesne profits and submits that the Court would have no jurisdiction to decide this aspect of the case. This submission is rejected. The land/ property of a citizen cannot be appropriated by the State without recourse to law. This appeals are disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Records be sent back to the Court of the District Judge forthwith. December 15, 2009 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.