ROSHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE landowners are not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the learned Single Judge. They have, thus, filed these four Letters Patent Appeals. A few facts may be noticed.

(2.) ON November 16, 1981 the State of Haryana issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for acquisition of land situated in village Daulatpur Nasirabad. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation on the basis of the nature of the land. The landowners sought references under Section 18. The District Judge held that since the land was being acquired for the purpose of development of residential and commercial areas, the nature of the land viz. Chahi or Barani was not relevant. He assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 28/- per square yard. Not satisfied with the award, the landowners approached the High Court through different appeals. The solitary contention raised on behalf of the landowners was that the market value of the land should have been assessed at the rate of Rs. 33/- per square yard. This contention was accepted. Despite that, these appeals have been filed.

(3.) WE have perused these judgments. It is the admitted position that the land which was the subject matter of these two cases was acquired by a different notification. It is located in different villages. Thus, these decisions cannot constitute a valid basis for determining the market value of the land which is the subject matter of the present cases. Resultantly, learned counsel can derive no benefit from these decisions.