SARSWATI ROHAL Vs. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE all the appeals are directed against the common award dated 22.3.1999 passed by the District Judge, Shimla in Land Reference No.38 -S/4 of 1996,36 -S/4 of 1996, 39 -S/4 of 1996 and 40 -S/4 of 1996 as such all these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) THE brief facts necessary for the adjudication of these appeals are that the Government of Himachal Pradesh issued a notification under section 4 read with section 17(4) of the land Acquisition Act, 1894(hereinafter referred to as the Act for convenience sake) on 17.7.1993 for acquisition of 80 -17 bighas land bearing Khasra Nos. 593/327/6, 328, 330, 331, 333 and 353 situated in Mauja Pateog,Tehsil and District Shimla for public purpose i.e. for construction of residential colony and development under interim Development Plan in Kasumpati Zone. The notification was published in the Rajpatra on 14.8.1993 and in two daily newspapers, namely, Vir Partap and Himachal Times on 26.8.1993 and 25.8.1993,respectively. The land was sought to be acquired under the provision of section 17(4) of the Act also. Thereafter notifications under sections 6 and 7 were issued on 4.6.1994 and the same were published on 25.6.1994 in the Tribune and in Punjab Kesari on 28.6.1994. These were published in Rajpatra on 18.6.1994. Thereafter the land was measured and the Land Acquisition Collector in the presence of the interested persons and the representatives of the Himachal Pradesh Nagar Vikas Pradhikaran for whom the land was acquired. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 27.6.1996 held that the entire notified land was Ghasni and that the average market value of Ghasni land was Rs.1,53,074.40 paise. He observed that 40% deduction was required to be made in the compensation amount on account of development charges and after making the aforesaid deduction, he awarded compensation @ Rs.91,845/ -. Compensation for the trees standing on the acquired land was got assessed and on the basis of the assessment, a sum of Rs.2,34,459.15 paise was awarded on account of the value of the timber trees in addition to the value of the land. A sum of Rs. 6,912/ - was awarded on account of the value of structures. The claimants were held entitled to statutory benefits. The appellants(hereinafter referred to as the claimants for convenience sake)filed reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the award dated 27.6.1996. These were separately registered. The learned District Judge framed the following issues for determination:

(3.) THE learned District Judge, Shimla vide award dated 22.3.1999 assessed the average marked value of the land @ Rs.3,85,909/ - on the basis of Ex.PW -3/A,Ex.PW -5/A, Ex.PW -6/A, Ex.PW -8/A,Ex.PW -8/B,Ex.PW -10/A and Ex.PW -10/B. The learned District Judge deducted 50% on account of development charges and consequently the market value of the acquired land was held @ Rs.1,92,954/ - at the time of its acquisition. The learned District Judge has held the claimant entitled to other benefits accruing under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants have filed these appeals under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the enhancement of the compensation.