Judgment

1. Delay, in filing the application(s) for substitution, if any, is condoned. Application(s) for substitution, if any, is/are allowed.

2. Delay, if any, in filing the special leave petitions is condoned.

3. Leave granted.

4. These appeals are directed against the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in a batch of Regular First Appeals, whereby and whereunder, the High Court had disposed of all the matters in light of its judgment and order in R.F.A. No. 2695 of 2002 and connected matters dated 05.11.2012.

5. The lis in this batch pertains to acquisition of various lands situated principally in villages Fatehpur, Maheshpur, Kundli and Railley by the Respondent-State under three different Notifications issued Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short, "the Act") in 29.01.1990, 21.12.1994 and 26.04.1995. Since the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) in all the matters have either followed or relied upon the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in R.F.A. No. 2695 of 2002 (S.L.P. (C) Nos. 26432-26443 of 2013 before this Court), for the sake of convenient disposal of this case, we would only notice the facts in S.L.P. (C) Nos. 26432-26443 of 2013.

6. Brief facts of the leas case are: The Respondent-State had issued a Notification Under Section 4 of the Act to acquire certain lands in the aforesaid villages for the public purpose of development and utilization of land of Panchkula by Haryana Urban Development Authority under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, dated 29.01.1990. After due consideration of the objections filed by the land-loosers Under Section 5-A of the Act, the acquiring authority had recommended issuance of a notification Under Section 6 of the Act to the State Government. Accordingly, the State Government had issued a Notification, declaring that the said land would be acquired for the notified public purpose, dated 25.01.1991.

7. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, "the LAC"), by an award dated 11.10.1991, awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs. 1 lakh per acre in respect of the claimants land.

8. The claimants, not being satisfied with the compensation so awarded by the LAO, approached the latter and sought for a reference Under Section 18 of the Act to the Civil Court for determination of the actual market value of the land acquired by the State Government. The LAC had referred the case of the land-loosers to the Reference Court. The Reference Court determined the market value of the acquired lands at Rs. 160/- per square yard, by award dated 20.12.2001.

9. Dissatisfied by the aforesaid award, claimants and the Respondent-State filed Regular First Appeals before the High Court.

10. The High Court remanded the said appeals to the Reference Court for fresh adjudication of the market value of the acquired lands by order dated 08.11.2006.

11. Since all the matters were remanded to the Reference Court, it would be appropriate to notice the compensation awarded by the various awards passed by the Reference Court in respect to the lands acquired in the four villages with the common thread of reasoning. The awards dated 10.12.2008, 10.02.2009 and 16.02.2009 qua the properties acquired through notification, dated 29.01.1990, determined the compensation at the rate of Rs. 394/- per sq. yd., while the awards dated 16.04.2002 and 30.04.2005, qua the properties acquired through notification, dated 26.04.1995, determined the compensation at Rs. 350/- per sq. yd. and Rs. 256/- per sq. yd., respectively.

12. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the claimants approached the High Court in Regular First Appeals for determination of compensation by way of enhancement over the compensation assessed by the Reference Court. Cross appeals were filed by the Respondent-State against the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Reference Court.

13. The High