BIKRAMJIT SINGH Vs. PUNJAB STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment of mine would dispose of two Regular First Appeal Nos. 102 and 103 of 1985 as they arise out of the common award given by the learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar.

(2.) Land measuring 44,21 acres was acquired by the State of Punjab by issuance of a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 19.2.1974 published on 8.3.1974 in the official gazette. The purpose of acquisition was the construction of a 'bye-pass'. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award No. 1 dated 21.5.1981 assessed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 14296.00 per acre. On a reference under Section 18 of the Act, the award of the Collector was maintained by the learned Additional District Judge. While upholding the award the learned Additional District Judge has relied upon mutition Exhibit Rule 2. Even the claimants relied upon certain mutations which were not relied upon by the learned Additional District Judge on the short ground that no clear evidence was led to indicate the exact distances of the land which was the subject matter of particular mutation and the distance between the acquired land. It was also observed that it was not possible to hold that the acquired land had any tendency of being developed into residential colony.

(3.) The learned counsel for the claimants has vehemently argued that both the appeals can be disposed of by following the judgment of this Court rendered in Regular First Appeal No. 1294 of 1987-State of Punjab v. Assa Singh decided on March 13, 1987 by G.C. Mital, J. This Court while dismissing the appeals of the State of Punjab maintained the award of the Additional District Judge by which Rs. 36000/- per acre were granted for the entire land measuring 331 Kanals 18 Marlas except the small area belonging to Assa Singh whose land was in depression and who was granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 32000/- per acre. There is considerable force in the argument of the counsel for the claimants. The land which was subjected to acquisition and which was the subject matter of decision in R.F.A. No. 1294 of 1987 was situated in village Muradpur. It has come in the statement of A.W. 3 Kapur Singh that the revenue estate of Mallian where the acquired land in the present case is situated adjoins the revenue estate of village Muradpur the acquisition of which was the subject matter of decision before G.C. Mital, J. The acquired land in the case before G.C. Mital, J. was 41 acres 3 kanals and 18 marlas whereas in the present case the land measures 4421 acres. The date of notification in Punjab State v. Assa Singh's case under Section 4 was February 12, 1974 whereas in the present case it is dated February 19, 1974 under Section 4 of the Act. The distinguishing feature, namely, the purpose of acquisition in village Muradpur for the establishment of a New Grain Market Tarn Taran and the public purpose in the present case, namely, the construction of a 'bye-pass' would not make even the slightest difference because it has further come in the statement of A.W. 1 Bur Singh that Tarn Taran and village Malhian adjoins each other. It has not only come in the statement of the claimants' witnesses but even in the statement of R.W. 2 Kuldip Singh, Naib Tehsildar that the land of village Malhian adjoins the land of village Muradpura. This being the factual position it is apparent that the land in both the villages had the same potentialities, may be/one chunk of land has been acquired for one purpose and the other chunk of land has been acquired for a different purpose.