I.A. No.1/2014 filed for condoning the delay of 93 days in filing Miscellaneous First Appeal No.100726/2014 is allowed.

2. Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants.

3. The appellant is the State in these appeals. The respondents were the claimants whose lands have been acquired in Gaddanakeri village, Bagalkot taluk and district. The plots of land were acquired by the Bagalkot Town Development Authority, Bagalkot, for laying a water pipe line to Navanagar and Gaddanakeri village. The Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘L.A. Act’, for brevity) was said to have published in the year 2005 vide Notification dated 21.11.2005 and the Final Notification was issued on 25.06.2007 and an award came to be passed on 30.10.2008. It was found by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in terms of the award that land bearing Survey No.156/A was converted into nonagricultural purposes by the competent Authority, namely, The Special Deputy Commissioner, Bijapur, in respect of 4 acres of land by an order dated 04.08.1983 and with a condition that construction would have to be put up within two years from the date of the order and it is on this basis that the respondent claimants had claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.200/to Rs.300/per square foot. This was rejected by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, on the footing that, on a spot inspection, the Officer had found that though the land was converted for nonagricultural use, no layout had been formed and the property consisted of eucalyptus trees and it was a rocky area and it was totally unfit for cultivation. It was not assessed to tax, and therefore, no market value was fixed and the claim for compensation was rejected outright.

4. The respondents, thereafter, being aggrieved by the award, had filed claim petitions under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, raising several grounds, namely, that the award was unjust and illegal. The land being treated as ‘Pot Kharab’ was without reference to the fact that it was indeed converted for non-agricultural purposes and the question of considering the land as ‘Pot Kharab’ or unarable did not arise. It was converted for such nonagricultural use as on the date of the publication of Notification under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act, and therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer was not justified in negating the claim as regards the compensation. The plots were situated within the Town Planning Area of Bagalkot and Gaddanakeri cross and are at a distance of 300 metres from the acquired plots and the Government itself has acquired and formed a Rehabilitation Centre in the vicinity of the land and these plots were sold in the market at Rs.55/to Rs.500/per square foot and that the lands in the vicinity also being dealt with as nonagricultural lands were being built up and it was also close to National Highway 218, and hence, the claim was just and fair, which the Land Acquisition Officer had negated. It is on these contentions that the Reference Court after consideration of the claim and the objections filed by the State, had framed the following points for consideration –

1. Whether claim petitions are well within the period of limitation and the same are valid references?

2. Whether claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation, if so at what rate?

3. Whether claimants are entitled for the relief sought for?

4. What order or award?

5. The above points were answered in the affirmative and the Court has awarded a compensation of Rs.153/per square foot with interest thereon at 12% per annum with all statutory benefits. It is that which is sought to be challenged in these appeals.

6. The primary contention of the learned Government Pleader is that there is material on record to indicate that the land was treated as ‘Pot Kharab’ from inception. In that, the revenue records had been ascertained on the basis of which the Notification under Section 4(1) of the L.A. Act was iss