RFA No. 648 of 1998 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 648 of 1998 (O&M) Date of decision: 5.10.2010 Tanuj Krishna Sahgal .. Appellant v. Union Territory, Chandigarh .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. P. C. Dhiman, Ms. Ekta Thakur, Mr. B. S. Saini and Mr. Hardip Singh, Advocates for the land owners. Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Mr. Vishal Sodhi, Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Mr. Deepak Sharma and Ms. Lisa Gill, Advocates for Union Territory, Chandigarh. Rajesh Bindal J. 1. This order will dispose of RFA Nos. 648 to 651, 1360 to 1363, 2847 to 2849 of 1998; R.F.A. Nos. 2313 to 2316 of 1999; R.F.A. Nos. 1762, 2825 to 2827, 4683 of 2001; R.F.A. Nos. 680, 1978, 2697, 2698, 2749, 3245 to 3247, 3967, 3983, 4033, 4116, 4149, 4160 of 2002; R.F.A. Nos. 274, 278, 1703 to 1725, 2308, 2470 to 2472, 2501, 2583 of 2003; R.F.A. Nos. 588, 1872, 1889 to 1891 of 2004; R.F.A. Nos. 650, 753 of 2005; R.F.A. No. 129 of 2006; R.F.A. Nos. 2683, 4093 of 2008; R.F.A. Nos. 1613, 1614 of 2009; R.F.A. No. 822 of 2010 and Cross Objections No. 104-CI of 2007, 33-CI, 34-CI, 35-CI of 2009. as common questions of law and facts are involved. 2. In the appeals filed by the land owners, they are seeking further enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned court below for the acquired RFA No. 648 of 1998 [2] land, whereas in the appeals filed by Union Territory, Chandigarh, the prayer is for reduction thereof. 3. The facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 648 of 1998. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 10.1.1992, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), the land in question, situated in the revenue estate of village Manimajra, Union Territory, Chandigarh was acquired. The same was followed by notification dated 23.6.1992, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector'), vide award dated 11.11.1992, assessed the market value of chahi land @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 4,35,600/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned by both the parties in the present set of appeals. 5. Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that close to the acquisition of land in the present case vide notification dated 27.11.1991, land quite close to the acquired land was acquired for the purpose of use of Nurseries. The present land is located on a road leading to Railway Station from the light point at Chandigarh-Kalka road, whereas the land acquired vide notification dated 27.11.1991 is located on the other side of the crossing on road leading from light point to IT Park, which was developed later on. For the acquisition of land vide notification dated 27.11.1991, this Court in RFA No. 832 of 2002—Smt. Parminder Kaur and others v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, decided on 18.4.2009, assessed the value @ ` 196/- per square yard. The land owners in the present case be also awarded same compensation. 6. Learned counsels for Union Territory could not dispute the factual position, as stated by learned counsel for the land owners regarding the acquisition of land, its location and the judgment of this court in Smt. Parminder Kaur's case (supra). 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. 8. As far as location of the land is concerned, the facts, as stated by learned counsel for the land owners, are not in dispute as is even evident from the site plan shown in the court. The land acquired vide notification dated 27.11.1991 is located on the left side of the light point at Chandigarh- Kalka Road, from where on the right side the road leads to Chandigarh Railway Station. For the land acquired for the purpose of development as nurseries on the left side of the light RFA No. 648 of 1998 [3] point, this court in Smt. Parminder Kaur's case (supra) had assessed the value @ ` 196/- per square yard. In the opinion of this court, the land in question also has similar location and potential. Even the Collector had also assessed the compensation for the land pertaining to both the aforesaid acquisitions @ ` 2,00,000/- per acre. Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any reason to deprive the land owners in the present set of appeals the same amount of compensation. Accordingly, the land owners are held entitled to compensation for the acquired land @ ` 196/- per square yard alongwith all the statutory benefits available to them under the Act. 9. To ensure that the landowners are not fleeced by the middleman in the process of disbursement of enhanced compensation, Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6515 of 2009 –Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation v. Pran Sukh and others, decided on 17.8.2010, issued certain directions. I deem it appropriate to issue same directions in the present set of appeals as well. The same are as under: “With a view to ensure that the land owners are not fleeced by the middleman, we deem it appropriate to issue following further directions: (i) The Land Acquisition Collector shall depute officers subordinate to him not below the rank of Naib Tehsildar, who shall get in touch with all the land owners and/or their legal representatives and inform them about their entitlement and right to receive enhanced compensation. (ii) The concerned officers shall also instruct the land owners and/or their legal representatives to open savings bank account in case they already do not have such account. (iii) The bank account numbers of the land owners should be given to the Land Acquisition Collector within three months. (iv) The Land Acquisition Collector shall deposit the cheques of compensation in the bank accounts of the land owners.” 10. The appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated above. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 5.10.2010 mk RFA No. 648 of 1998 [4]