CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2299 OF 1989 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: July 19 , 2011. Parties Name Shanti Devi and others ...PETITIONERS VERSUS The Union of India ...RESPONDENT CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih PRESENT: Mr. H.S. Gill, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. KBS Mann, Advocate, for the petitioners Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Advocate, for the respondent. Jasbir Singh, J. (oral) JUDGMENT Petitioners were the owners of land measuring about 5 Kanals. Their land was acquired by the respondent – UT Administration by issuing notifications under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2299 OF 1989 -2- short the Act). Qua the acquired land, Award was passed on March 2, 1978. The petitioners did not file any application under Section 18 of the Act. However, many other land owners filed applications under Section 18 of the Act, which were taken up by the Land Acquisition Tribunal and the amount of compensation was enhanced vide order dated April 10, 1980. Feeling dissatisfied , those land owners came to this Court and the learned Single Judge vide order dated August 18, 1981, enhanced the compensation amount to the extent as mentioned hereinafter, i.e. at the rate of Rs. 2045/- per Marla with regard to land falling in the belt upto depth of 140 ft. from the roads leading from ManiMajra to Panchkula and from ManiMajra to Mansa Devi temple and @ Rs. 75000/- per Acre for the remaining acquired land. It is necessary to mention here that one Jagdev Singh, whose land was also acquired vide the notification, mentioned above, filed an application under Section 18 of the Act. The Collector failed to refer that application for adjudication to the competent Court. Shri Jagdev Singh came to this Court with a prayer that directions be issued to the Collector to refer his application to the Tribunal for adjudication. His writ petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated August 16, 1983. The Chandigarh Administration was directed to refer case of Jagdev Singh to the District Judge for determination of compensation. Accordingly in the case of Jagdev Singh, an Award was passed by the District Judge, Chandigarh, on December 5, 1985, and compensation was awarded to him on the same scale as was granted to the other land owners by this Court vide judgment dated CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2299 OF 1989 -3- August 18, 1981. At that stage, the petitioners filed an application under Section 28-A of the Act for redetermination of compensation amount in their favour on the basis of an Award passed in favour of Jagdev Singh on December 5, 1985. The Collector after noting the provisions of Section 28- A of the Act came to a conclusion that application filed by the petitioners was within limitation. As per mandate of the said provision, the compensation was redetermined qua the petitioners in the light of an award passed in favour of Jagdev Singh. The petitioners were also held entitled to claim 30% solatium and 12% per annum additional market value on the enhanced amount of compensation. However, interest @ 9% for the first year and 15% per annum thereafter was declined to them by stating that they had failed to file application under Section 18 of the Act in time. We feel that the order passed to that extent cannot be sustained. It is apparent from the record that the land was acquired in the year 1976. Award was passed on March 2, 1978. Appeals filed by the other land owners were allowed by this Court vide judgment dated August 18, 1981. The amount of compensation was enhanced and the land owners were also given all statutory benefits as per law. In the case of Jagdev Singh, Award was passed by the District Judge on December 5, 1985. The petitioners moved application for redetermination of the compensation under Section 28-A of the Act within limitation. If that is so, relief of interest cannot be declined to them. They are entitled to get amount of compensation and other statutory benefits in the same terms as was granted to Shri Jagdev Singh. Shri Kaushal has failed to show any reason as to why the petitioners are not entitled to get statutory interest, which has been declined to them by CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2299 OF 1989 -4- the Land Acquisition Collector. In view of above, we allow this writ petition and hold the petitioners entitled to get interest @ Rs. 9% per annum for the first year and thereafter @ 15% per annum till such time the payment is made. Under an interim order, surety was furnished by the petitioners to get amount of compensation. In view of this order, the said surety stands discharged. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge (Augustine George Masih) Judge July 19, 2011 DKC