CWP No.13588 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13588 of 2009 Decided on : 27.01.2010 Jaswant Singh ... Petitioner versus State of Punjab & others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present : Mr. Manjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl. AG, Punjab Mr. S.K.Sahore, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** 1.To be referred to the reporters or not? 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar, J. This instant petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution for issuance of direction to the respondents to disburse the amount of compensation in respect of land acquired by the National Highways Authority of India through the offices of respondents No.3 to 5. It has not been disputed that the award was announced on 25.05.2007 and the possession was taken on the same day. According to the award, the rate of the land was fixed @ Rs.1.50 crores per acre by the competent authority. However, CWP No.13588 of 2009 -2- the amount of compensation was not paid to the petitioner. After the filing of the petition, the amount of compensation has been paid on 13.12.2009 along with interest from 23.02.2009 to 13.12.2009 @ 9% per annum. The dispute which survives for determination is whether the interest from the date of announcement of award i.e. 25.05.2007 till the date of disbursement of compensation or 23.02.2009 is payable or not. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has argued that the delay, which is imputable to the National Highways Authority of India, could only be treated as the period of delay for payment of interest. According to the letter dated 23.02.2009 (Annexure R-5/1), the payment for disbursement of compensation was to be given to the landowners and therefore, delay thereafter would not interest and no interest was payable before that date. It has also been pointed out that the amount of compensation was deposited with the competent authority namely respondent No.5 on 30.05.2007 and the same was deposited in fixed deposit by respondent No.5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and are of the considered view that the amount of compensation is required to be disbursed to the landowners on the date of announcement of award and taking of possession which was simultaneous in the instant case i.e. on 25.05.2007. The compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioner because order concerning disbursement of the compensation is required to be counter signed by respondent No.2. The writing of letter CWP No.13588 of 2009 -3- dated 23.02.2009 (Annexure R-5/1) is insignificant because compensation has to be offered to the petitioner on the date of announcement of award and taking of possession i.e. on 25.05.2007. It shows that the petitioner has been deprived of the use of amount from 25.05.2007 to 23.02.2009 and he is entitled to interest @ 9% per annum. It has to be the same rate on which the interest has been paid to him from 23.02.2009 to 13.12.2009. Morese the amount has been kept in fixed deposit by the competent authority – respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 could not have argued that delay in payment of compensation had occurred only from 23.02.2009 because without countersigning the order, compensation could not be disbursed to the landowner. In fact, National Highway Authority – respondent No.5 is accustom to delay payment of compensation as has been seen on earlier occasions. They must put their house in order. Accordingly, we direct the respondent No.2 & 5 to disburse the same to the petitioner @9% per annum from 25.05.2007 to 22.02.2009. The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Consequently, this petition is allowed. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE January 27, 2010 (AJAY TEWARI) sonia JUDGE