RFA No. 101 of 1994 -1- In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh RFA No. 101 of 1994 (O&M) Date of decision : 15.12.2010 Nachhatar Singh ..... Appellant vs State of Punjab and another .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Munish Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Yatinder Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. The landowner hasfiled the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that the land situated in village Bholon Kalewal, Hadbast No. 362, Tehsil and District Ropar, was acquired by the State Government vide notification dated 14.3.1988 issued Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for construction of Upper Branch Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') vide his award dated 30.3.1989 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 36,000/- per acre for chahi, and ` 14,807/- per acre for barani/ gair mumkin kinds of land. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. The learned court below vide award dated 17.2.1993 dismissed the reference and upheld the award of the Collector. It is this award of the learned Reference Court which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the court below had wrongly rejected the claim of the appellant as there was a settlement arrived at between the landowners and the then Chief Minister of Punjab, according to which the value of the land acquired for construction of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal was assessed @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 75,000/- per acre for barani and ` 60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land and this award was upheld by this court in a number of judgments. The land in the present case was also acquired for the same very purpose. It was prayed that award of the court below be set aside and same compensation be awarded to the landowner in the present appeal. RFA No. 101 of 1994 -2- On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that award of the learned court below is according to the evidence led by the appellant. However, he could not dispute the fact that the settlement arrived at between the landowners and the then Chief Minister of Punjab, according to which the value of the land acquired for construction of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal, assessed @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 75,000/- per acre for barani and ` 60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land, was upheld by this court in a number of judgments. No other argument was raised. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the State that the land was acquired for the construction of Upper Branch Canal which is also a part of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal. It is also admitted that as per the settlement arrived at between the landowners and the then Chief Minister of Punjab, the value of the land acquired for construction of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal was assessed @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 75,000/- per acre for barani and ` 60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land and the same awards were upheld by this court in a number of judgments. As the similarly situated landowners have been awarded compensation @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 75,000/- per acre for barani and ` 60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land, the appellant cannot be denied the same benefit. Accordingly, the award of the learned court below is set aside and it is held that the appellant is entitled to compensation for the acquired land @ ` 1,00,000/- per acre for chahi, ` 75,000/- per acre for barani and ` 60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. He shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available under the Act. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. 15.12.2010 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge