JIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE relevant facts which are not in dispute, are taken from the judgment of learned Single Judge, which run thus : the respondent vide its notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') sought to acquire about 200.71 acres of land situated in village Maheshpur, Tehsil Kalka, District Ambala for development and utilisation of Industrial Area. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 17.9.1986 assessed the market value of the land "as one unit" at the rate of Rs. 57,280/- for chahi, Rs. 38,240/- for Barani, Rs. 19,040/- for Banjar and Rs. 9,440/- for Gair Mumkin Rasta per acre. On reference being sought under Section 18 of the Act, the District Judge awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre uniformly.

(2.) THE learned Single Judge, during the course of appeal permitted the appellants to place on record four awards Ex.-C-1 to C-4 by way of additional evidence and observed with respect to the the potentialities of the lands to the effect that the lands of village Maheshpur were acquired along with the lands of villages Majri, Haripur, Ralli, Ralla, Abheypur, Dhillan, Tansu, Judian, Ferozepur Kalan and Ferozepur. It is situated on Ambala-Kalka road, and is opposite to Sectors 2, 4, 5, 7 and 12-A, of Panchkula which is a satellite town of Chandigarh. It was observed that the land in dispute is situated and is said to be surrounded by Bus Stand, Cinema, Commercial Establishments and Residential Houses etc. within a radius of 1/2 kilometer. In spite of the land being situated around the developed area yet it was being used as an agricultural land at the time of acquisition. The learned Single Judge after appreciating the evidence on record held that the land in dispute has potentialities of urbanisation and consequently cannot be assessed as an agricultural land. The learned Single Judge relying on the law laid down in LPA No. 1207 of 1981 decided on 22.9.1982 to the effect that where the lands of different villages fall within the potentiality of urbanisation, the market value of the same has to be assessed or fixed at a uniform rate irrespective of the nature of the land or the estate to which it belongs or in which it falls.

(3.) THE only contention raised by learned counsel for the appellants is that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned Single Judge should not have assessed the market value of the land by taking out the average price from the awards produced. Since the highest market value represented by the award exhibit C-4 with respect to village Fatehpur is Rs. 3,63,000/- per acre and the market value of land represented by exhibit C-2 with respect to village Rally is Rs. 2,25,000/- per acre, the compensation at the said rates should be awarded to the claimants also. Alternatively, it was suggested that even if the average price is to be taken, it has to be average of the rates reflected by exhibits C-2 and C-4 which concededly are the basis to assess the market value, which finding has not been challenged by the State Counsel seriously and calculated on this basis, the rate comes to Rs. 2,94,000/- per acre. In order to support his contention learned counsel for the appellants relies on State of Punjab v. Hans Raj (dead) by L.Rs Sohan Singh, 1994(2) Recent Revenue Reports, 454 wherein in Hon'ble the Apex Court observed :