LAWS(P&H)-1999-2-41

SHANTI DEVI ETC Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On February 18, 1999
SHANTI DEVI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Haryana on 4th June, 1986 issued a notification No. LAC (G)-86/1783 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with an intention to acquire 75.34 acres of land in the revenue estate Bhiwani Lehar, District Bhiwani and 8.89 acres of land in revenue estate village Palwas, District Bhiwani. In furtherance to this notification, the government actually acquired the said land and issued notification No. LAC (G)-87/13 dated 15.4.1987 under Section 6 of the Act

(2.) After due notice to the land owners, the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate Department, Haryana, Gurgaon, published two awards, vide Award No. 7 of 1987-88 and Award No. 17 of 1987-88. In Award No. 7 of 1987-88 dated 10.11.1987 the Land Acquisition Collector, awarded a sum of Rs. 57,500/- per acre for Nehri land while for the other kind of land like Tal, Gairmumkin and Ban-jar, he awarded Rs. 55,200/- per acre. In other award, being Award No. 17 of 1987-88 dated 31.3.1988 the Collector awarded the same amount of compensation.

(3.) The claimants being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estates Department, Haryana, Gurgaon, for their respective land, filed objections, which were referred under Section 17 of the Act by the Land Acquisition Collector to the learned District Judge, Bhiwani. In all, 151 references were made by the Land Acquisition Collector arising out of Awards Nos. 7 and 17 of 1987-88 respectively. All these 151 references were disposed of by the learned District Judge by awarding uniform rate of compensation to the extent of Rs. 125 per square yards amount to Rs. 6,05,000/- in face of the amount of Rs. 11.81 paise per square yard awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. All these 151 references were disposed of by the learned District Judge, while awarding the aforestated compensation by three different judgments, details of which are as under:-