JUDGMENT :

KARDAK ETE, J.

1. Heard Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, learned Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr. Y. Doloi, learned Senior Government Panel Counsel also heard Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents in L.A.Appl./1/2022, 2/2022, & 3/2022 and for the appellants in L.A. Appl./1/2023, 2/2023 and 3/2023.

2. These appeals being analogous, I propose to dispose of the same by this common judgment and order.

3. The present appeals under section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 being L.A. Appl./1/2022, L.A.Appl./2/2022, L.A.Appl./3/2022 have been preferred by the Union of India against the judgment dated 12.09.2022 and order dated 13.09.2022 passed by the Reference authority cum District & Sessions Judge, Aalo in Reference case nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 2021 and Review petition No. 1, 2 and 3 of 2022 whereby the Reference authority has determined the market value of acquired land @ Rs. 353/- per sq. mtrs. enhancing from Rs. 125/- and 150/- as awarded by the Collector and the solatium, multiplication factor and interests were also added thereon.

4. The cross appeals being L.A. Appl./1/2023, L.A.Appl./2/2023, L.A.Appl./3/2023 have been preferred by the landowners, i.e. Shri Thinley Sona and Others, Shri Libo Ragmuk and Ors. and Shri. Dorjee Khandu Chukla and Ors against the judgment dated 12.09.2022 of the Reference authority for enhancing the market value and also for a direction to the Collector to make determination of past occupation rent/charges till the date of acquisition notification and make payment of the same.

5. The Indian Army occupied stretches of land in Shi-Yomi District particularly at Mechuka, Segong, Tato, Yomi Circle, Arunachal Pradesh since the last several decades. The lands of the landowners were acquired in compliance of the direction of the High Court dated 17.03.2020 and 19.03.2020 passed in WP (C)/25/2020, WP (C)/26/2020 and WP (C)/27/2020 whereby this Court had directed for payment of compensation to the landowners.

6. The L.A. Appeal No. 1, 2 and 3 of 2022 filed by the Union of India arises out of the judgment and order dated 12.09.2022 and 13.09.2022 in the Reference case nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 2021 on the ground that the Reference authority failed to appreciate the facts of the matter and the correct position of law holding the field. According to the appellant Union of India, the reference authority failed to address the argument of the learned counsel with regard to section 40 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (in short the 2013 Act) as the Reference authority has given no iota of reasoning for deviating from the express provisions of Section 40 of 2013 Act. The further case of the appellant is that the computation of enhanced amount of compensation awarded by the Reference authority as enhanced from Rs. 125 sq.mtrs. to Rs. 353 sq. mtrs. is entirely without basis, and is an arbitrary figure as no computation has been provided, which is in gross violation of Section 23 and Section 26 of the 2013 Act.

7. The appellant, i.e. the Union of India raises principally two issues namely: i) that the land was acquired under the Urgency Clause of Section 40 of 2013 Act for which no addition compensation could have been awarded, and ii) that valuation of the acquired land has been determined with arbitrary figure as no computation has been provided in gross violation of Section 23 and Section 26 of the 2013 Act.

8. The appellant further contended that the lands of the landowners were acquired in compliance of the direction of this Hon’ble Court passed in WP (C)/25/2020, WP (C)/26/2020 and WP (C)/27/2020 vide Order dated 17.03.2020 and 19.03.2020 under section 40 of the 2013 Act. Formal land acquisition proceeding were initiated following due sanction by the Hon’ble President of India whereby, Section 11 and Section 19 Notifications were p