HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOTICE of motion.

(2.) IN view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, no reply -affidavit is required to be filed by the respondents at this stage.

(3.) THE petitioners' main grievance is that while assessing the compensation, the benefit of Sections 23 and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as '1894 Act'), namely, solatium and interest was not granted to them despite the fact that this Court in M/s. Golden Iron and Steel Forgings versus Union of India and others, : 2011(4) RCR (Civil) 375, has categorically held that even in the case of acquisition under the National Highways Act, 1956, the above mentioned two statutory benefits are equally admissible to the affected land -owners. The petitioners also rely upon two decisions of this Court, dated 27.9.2012 passed in CWP No. 7457 of 2012 (Bhag Singh and another versus Commissioner, Jalandhar Division and others) and dated 27.9.2012 passed in CWP No. 14642 of 2012 (Prem Kaur versus Union of India and others) whereby the benefit of solatium and interest in terms of the above -cited decision of this Court, has been extended to the land -owners whose lands were also acquired alongwith that of the petitioners.