GURAJAIB SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of 49 appeals i.e. RFA Nos. 6739 to 6751 of 2014, 10487, 10489, 10490, 10492 to 10498 of 2014, 10510 to 10513 of 2014, 5485 of 2014, 7020 to 7024 of 2014, 7305, 7306, 7651, 7652, 8120 to 8126 of 2014, 8999 of 2014, 9539, 9540 of 2014 and 643 and 644 of 2015, filed both by the land owners and the State as common questions of facts and law are involved in all the appeals. Reference is being made to the facts of RFA No. 6744 of 2014, Gurajaib Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others.

(2.) The present appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the award of the Reference Court, Faridkot dated 15.01.2014 wherein, the Reference Court has enhanced the market value to Rs.6,67,000/- per acre on a uniform basis on the ground that the rates of the Government are fixed from Rs.5,00,000/- to 15,00,000/- per acre as per Mark A-1 and Mark A-3. The average having come to Rs.10,00,000/-, a 1/3rd cut has been put as per the settled principle to fix the market value as the land acquired measured 41.57 acres and enhance it from Rs.5,25,000/- for the 11 villages whereas for village Golewala, Rs.5,75,000/- per acre has been awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 09.10.2009.

(3.) On an earlier occasion, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.02.2016, in RFA No. 6744 of 2014, Gurajaib Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, had enhanced the market value to Rs.18,65,470/- per acre on the basis of Ex.A-2, a sale deed dated 25.11.2008, which was executed one day earlier to the Section 4 notification dated 26.11.2008. Apart from that, 30% on account of severance was also granted on the said market value on account of the fact that the land has been acquired for the purpose of construction of a Golewala Link Drain of the 12 villages. The State had gone in appeal i.e. Civil Appeal Nos. 23937-23985 of 2017, State of Punjab and others vs. Gurajaib Singh and others wherein, the said judgment was set aside on 15.12.2017 on the ground that neither any development cut had been imposed and severance also at 30% to every incumbent had been awarded without any rhyme or reason. It had not been noticed whether any inconvenience due to severance had taken place. The relevant part reads thus:-