STATE OF HARYANA Vs. HARISH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State is in appeal seeking reduction in the amount of compensation for the acquired land. Along with the appeals, applications seeking condonation of delay in filing and re -filing thereof have also been filed. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 26.6.1989, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired 655.93 acres of land, situated in village Ramgarh, Hadbast No. 232, Tehsil and District Panchkula for development and utilization of land as residential, commercial and institutional purposes in Urban Estate, Panchkula. The same was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act, issued on 25.6.1990. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, "the Collector') assessed the compensation @ Rs. 1,10,000/ - per acre for Chain and Abi land; Rs. 90,000/ - per acre for Barani land; Rs. 70,000/ - per acre for Banjar Kadim land and Rs. 50,000/ - per acre for Gair Mumkin kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference, the learned court below vide award dated 5.9.2009 determined the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 250/ - per square yard. It is the aforesaid award, which is impugned by the State before this court.

(2.) THERE is delay of 653 days in re -filing and 184 days in filing the appeal.

(3.) IN the present appeal, a perusal of the application seeking condonation of delay shows that the Additional District Judge decided the reference, vide award dated 5.9.2009. The District Attorney sent his comments to the Legal Remembrancer, Haryana vide letter dated 9.12.2009 conveying that limitation to file appeal was upto 5.12.2009. Meaning thereby even the District Attorney continued sleeping over the matter and sent his comments after the limitation for filing the appeal had already expired. The Legal Remembrancer, vide letter dated 31.12.2009, opined the case to be fit for filling appeal. The sanction was communicated to the Advocate General, Haryana, which was received in the office of the Land Acquisition Officer, Panchkula on 7.1.2010. It is pleaded in the application that time was taken in getting the judgment typed from the market and also in preparation of stay application and the supporting affidavit. It is claimed in the application that requisite documents were submitted in the office of Advocate General, Haryana, vide letter dated 21.4.2010. However, still the appeal was filed in this court on 11.6.2010. A perusal of the court fee annexed shows that the same was purchased on 23.4.2010. The same was returned with objections on 12.8.2010 as the appeal was barred by 184 days in filing. The office of Advocate General is manned by army of Law Officers. The officer, who filed the appeal, is expected to be aware of the fact that the appeal when being filed was belated and it required filing of an application for condonation of delay as well, but still he did not think it appropriate or part of his duly to file the same complete in all respects in court. Be that as it may, still when the appeal was returned with objections, the same was required to be re -filed within a period of 40 days complete in all respects, but the same was again filed on 17.11.2010 still incomplete and had to be returned back on 18.11.2010. The same was re -filed on 31.1.2011 to be returned on 1.2.2011, with the observation that objections already raised on 12.8.2010 had still not been complied with. Thereafter, it was refiled on 18.5.2012 to be returned again on 19.5.2012 and finally to be refiled on 9.7.2012. Further, the affidavit of the Collector filed in support of application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal is dated 3.11.2010 but states that documents were handed over in the office of Advocate General, Haryana on 11.11.2010.