UNION OF INDIA Vs. MUNSHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by special leave are directed against the common judgment and order dated 27th November, 1995 of the High Court for the states of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellant-UOI challenging various orders determining the compensation payable to the respondents herein under Section 28a of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The relevant facts of the case are these :- notification under Section 4 (1) read with sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was published on june 18, 1984. Land measuring 3609 Kanals and 16 marlas were sought to be acquired for extension of the Hissar Cantonment Area. By his award of 31st January, 1986 the Land Acquisition Collector categorised the lands into 5 categories and granted compensation at different rates for each category. A reference was made under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court by its award dated 23rd October, 1988 enhanced the compensation payable to the claimants. However, it divided the lands into only two categories, namely, block A and block B.

(2.) Not satisfied with the decree of the Reference Court, the claimants as well as union of India preferred Regular First Appeals before the High Court. A learned single Judge of the High Court by his judgment and order dated 24th August, 1993 further enhanced the compensation payable in respect of block A and B lands. Letters Patent Appeals filed by the Union of India were dismissed by order dated 17th june, 1994. Union of India filed special leave petitions against the dismissal of the letters Patent Appeals and notice was issued in the aforesaid special leave petitions on 27th January, 1995. Ultimately by judgment and order of 29th April, 1997 (judgment reported in 1997 6 SCC 159, Union of India and Ors. v. Mangatu Ram and Ors. ) this Court allowed the appeals filed by the Union of India and reduced the compensation payable to the claimants. This Court further categorised group A lands into two categories, those which fell within 500 yards of the bye-pass, and the other comprising the rest of the lands in category A.

(3.) While the special leave petitions were pending before this Court, some of the other owners/respondents herein filed applications under Section 28a of the Act claiming compensation at the same rates as were awarded to the other claimants pursuant to the decree of the Reference Court. Having regard to the provisions of section 28a of the Act, the Collector redetermined the compensation payable to the respondents herein, who had not preferred reference under Section 18 of the Act and who had moved the Collector within the period of limitation prescribed by law. The order redetermining the compensation under Section 28a of the Act was passed on 12th November, 1990.