R.F.A. No. 551 of 1992 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 551 of 1992 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.1.2011 State of Haryana .. Appellants v. Lekh Ram .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ... Rajesh Bindal J. The State of Haryana is in appeal challenging the award of the learned court below granting compensation to the respondent- land owner in terms of the judgment of this court. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 16.5.1978, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Haryana acquired 12.37 acres of land for construction of Kanwala Distributory. The same was followed by notification dated 16.5.1978, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 10,000/- per acre for chahi land; ` 8,000/- per acre for barani land and ` 3,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. Initially, the land owner received the amount of compensation. The other land owners moved the Collector for making references for determination of market value of their land. The learned court below assessed the market value @ ` 25,000/- per acre. In appeal, the same was upheld by this court. The present land owner moved application on 18.10.1986 before the Collector. On reference, the learned court below awarded compensation @ R.F.A. No. 551 of 1992 [ 2] ` 25,000/- per acre along with statutory benefits to the present land owner in terms of the judgment of this court. It is against this award, State of Haryana is in appeal before this court. Learned counsel for the State submitted that in the present case, the land owner had not filed any objections. He filed application only after the judgment of this court determining the compensation for the land acquired vide same notification. The submission was that the application was highly belated. Even otherwise, the same could not have been filed relying upon the judgment of this court as application under Section 28-A of the Act could be filed only on the basis of the award of the first court. Though as far as merits of the case are concerned, learned counsel for the State certainly has a point as in terms of settled position of law an application under Section 28-A of the Act could be filed only on the basis of a judgment of the Reference Court, whereas in the present case, the same was filed after the judgment of this court. However, still considering the fact that the land in question was acquired way back in the year 1978, the respondent-land owner owned only 3 kanals and 13 marlas of land and the enhanced compensation was merely @ ` 25,000/- per acre, which must have been disbursed to the land owner and the appeal is pending in this court for the last about two decades, I do not find it appropriate to interfere at this stage. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge 12.1.2011 mk