DIDAR SINGH Vs. JULLUNDUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST, JULLUNDUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution is directed against the award dated 22.5.1981 passed by the Tribunal constituted under the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 whereby the reference made to it at the behest of the petitioner under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was allowed and the amount of compensation as claimed was granted.

(2.) Petitioner was the occupier of the land in dispute which was acquired by the State Government for a development scheme framed by the Jalandhar Improvement Trust (for short the Trust). Didar Singh petitioner had installed a tube-well in khasra Nos. 6692 and 6693 for which he claimed compensation to the tune of Rs. 1000.00. The Collector by his award dated 5.1.196(5 awarded a sum of Rs. 150.00 only for boring the tube-well and for the underground pipes installed. He took into consideration the valuation of the said structure as worked out by the acquisition staff of the Trust. Feeling dissatisfied with the award the petitioner filed a reference application under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 contending that the compensation paid was less and that he was entitled to a sum of Rs. 1000.00. He also claimed compensation for the 4 pucca rooms constructed over the land in dispute and also for his tenancy rights over the land. The Tribunal accepted the contention of he petitioner and awarded Rs. 1000.00 as compensation for the tube-well as claimed. As regards the compensation for the structure, it was observed that that was the entitlement of the land owner whose claim for compensation was separately processed. Still not satisfied, he filed the present petition.

(3.) I have heard counsel for the respondents and perused the impugned award passed by the Tribunal and find no ground to interfere with the same, as regards the compensation for the tube-well, the petitioner claimed a sum of Rs. 1000.00 which has been awarded by the Tribunal. He can have no grievance in this regard. His claim for a higher amount in the writ petition is obviously misconceived and cannot be granted.