The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation rates under the Land Acquisition Act, considering the location, potential, and nature of the acquired lands.

JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Interlocutory Application No. 33721/2022 in Civil Appeals arising from Diary No. 392/2022 is allowed in terms of prayer (a) and the names of the proforma respondents are ordered to be deleted from the array of parties, at the risk and responsibility of the appellants.

1A. As common questions of law and facts arise in this group of appeals and, as such, in respect of the lands acquired of the same village – Kheri Sadh, District Rohtak, Haryana, but in two different phases, and village Baliyana, all these appeals are decided and disposed of together by this common judgment and order.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common final judgment and order dated 01.09.2021 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F.A. No. 1113/2016 and other allied First Appeals in respect of the lands acquired of village Kheri Sadh, District Rohtak, Haryana, for which notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) was issued on 9.6.2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Phase Acquisition’), both, the original claimants/landowners as well as the acquiring body/State have preferred the present appeals.

2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 10.11.2021 passed in R.F.A. No. 1632/2016 and other allied First Appeals in respect of the lands acquired of village Kheri Sadh, District Rohtak, Haryana, for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 13.02.2008 (hereinafter referred to as the ’Second Phase Acquisition’), the original claimants/landowners have preferred the present appeals.

2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 1.9.2021 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F.A. No. 521/2017 and other allied first appeals in respect of the land acquired of village Baliyana, District Rohtak for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 9.6.2006, the original claimants/landowners have preferred the present appeals arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 7850-7872/2022 and 1553/2022.

Facts of the case pertaining to Village Kheri Sadh:

3. The lands situated at village Kheri Sadh, District Rohtak, Haryana (First Phase Acquisition) came to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for the public purpose, namely, for setting up Industrial Model Township, Rohtak. Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 9.6.2006 proposing to acquire the lands situated in the village Kheri Sadh, totally admeasuring 126 acres, 7 kanals and 10 marlas. The lands were acquired for public purpose, namely for setting up Industrial Model Township, Rohtak. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 11.01.2007. The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award on 15.05.2007 determining the compensation at Rs. 16,00,000/- per acre.

3.1 References under Section 18 of the Act were made at the instance of the original claimants/landowners. Relying upon the sale instances/sale exemplars produced at Ex. P8 & P9 and after applying a cut of 20% for the lands abutting highway up to depth of one acre and beyond that, applying the cut of 38%, the Reference Court determined the compensation at Rs. 24,00,000/-per acre for the lands up to one acre on highway and for the remaining lands at Rs.19,77,000/-per acre.

3.2 In the appeals preferred by the original claimants/landowners, the High Court, by the impugned common judgment and order dated 1.9.2021, though agreed with the Reference Court as regards the relevant sale exemplars being Ex. P8 & P9, enhanced the compensation for the lands abutting highway up to one acre to Rs. 28,69,910/-per acre by reducing the cut to 10% from 20%. The High Court has dismissed the first appeals preferred by the landowners with respect to remaining lands beyond one acre abutting highway and has also dismissed the first appeals preferred by the State.