(2.) This order will dispose of R. F. As. 392, 393 and 403 of 1980 since common questions of facts and law arise.
(2.) These appeals have been filed against the order of Shri Surendra Prakash, Additional District Judge, Kangra at Dharamsala, to whom reference was made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. We need not go into the history of acquisition of land for the purpose of a reservoir of Beas Dam at Pong. It is given and discussed in detail in A. F. A. Division Bench judgment of this court in R. F. A. No. 220 of 1980 -State v. Jiwan Singh, [decided on 21st September 1980].
(3.) The land in question in the present appeals is of tika Dobinda of Mauza Mohara, Tehsil Dehra. We may record at this stage that in all the references oral evidence was produced only by the claimants and no oral evidence was produced by the State. The learned Additional District Judge on the basis of evidence on record came to the conclusion that the land in question, that is, of tika Dobinda, could be compared with the lands of tikas Kather, Khan and Mohara from the productivity and fertility point of view. He relied on Ex. P -l, the judgment of Shri Roop Singh Thakur, Additional District Judge, dated 21 -2 -1977 in reference No 399 of 1973 -Belt Ram v. Collector. In this judgment Shri Thakur observed : "In the award the collector has clearly stated that since the land of this tika i. e. Khan compared favourably with the land of tika Bihari the award whereof was announced on 2 -4 -1969, he had chosen to award the same rates in respect of different categories of lands in this tika as he had done in the case of tika Bihari." The tika in question with which Shri Roop Singh Thakur was concerned, was tika Khan, Mauza Anour. He had proceeded on the basis of the Land Acquisition Collector holding it equivalent to tika Bihari in all respects. The result was that Shri Surendra Prakash held tika Dobinda equivalent to tika Khan which was equivalent to tika Bihari. There was nothing wrong in reaching this conclusion.