(Sanjay Karol, J.) (Oral) - In the present case, the State has assailed the impugned Award dated 19.7.2005 passed by the District Judge, Shimla, in Land Reference Petition No. 29-S/4 of 2003 titled as Lachhu (deceased) through his LRs. Keshav Ram & Ors. v. State of H.P. and others,for the reasons that the enhancement of the compensation is on the higher side.

2.Brief facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under :

3.The claimants land ad-measuring 3-12 bighas comprised in Khasra No. 561/528 situated in village Rajhana, Tehsil Shimla, H.P. was acquired for the public purpose, namely, ‘construction of Sewerage Treatment Plant at Rajhana’. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), was lastly published in H.P. Rajpatra on 18.12.1999. The Collector, Land Acquisition, passed Award under Section 11 of the Act, whereby the market value of the acquired land for different categories was determined as under :-

(i) Kiar Awba : Rs. 3,37,391.22 per bigha

(ii) Kalahu Awbal : Rs. 3,37,391.22 per bigha

(iii) Bakhal Awbal : Rs. 3,37,391.22 per bigha

(iv) Bakhal Doem : Rs. 2,95,652.10 per bigha

(v) Banjar/Gair Mumkin: Rs. 86,956.50 per bigha

4.Being dissatisfied with the same, the claimants filed Land Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Act, seeking; (i) enhancement of the compensation, (ii) clarification with regard to the category of the acquired land.

5.Based on the pleadings of the parties, the Court below framed the following issue :-

(i) Whether the compensation amount paid to the petitioners in respect of their acquired land is not just and adequate, if so to what amount of additional compensation the petitioners are entitled to ? ......OPP

6.Opportunity to lead evidence was afforded to the parties.

7.Appreciating the material on record (oral or documentary), the Court below, by referring to the Sale Deed Ext.P-5 and the Awards passed by the District Judge in various land reference petitions and more particularly Awards Ext.P-8, Ext.P-9 and Ext.P-13 enhanced the market value of the land to Rs. 4,16,000/- per bigha.

8.With regard to the nature and classification of the acquired land without examining the factual matrix by relying upon the decision of this Court in Lalit Kumar v. State of H.P., 1998(1) SLC 41, uniformly applied the rates to the entire acquired land.

9.I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and also perused the record.

10.There is no dispute with regard to the measurement, the place and the ownership of the acquired land.

11.In order to prove its case, the claimants examined Shri Partap Thakur, Patwari Halqua Beulia (PW-1), Shri Pawan Sharma, Registration Clerk (PW-2) and Shri Keshav Ram (PW-3). In support of its case, the claimants also placed on record the certified copies of the awards passed by the District Judge in various land reference petitions being Ext.P-7, Ext.P-8, Ext.P-9, Ext.P-10, Ext.P-11, Ext.P-12 & Ext.P-13. For the purpose of disposal of the appeal, the Awards Ext. P-8, Ext.P-9 and Ext.P-13 would be relevant. In addition thereto, the claimants also proved on record the Deed Ext.P-5.

12.In rebuttal, the respondents examined Shri Hira Lal Sharma, Assistant Engineer I&PH (RW-1). No evidence has been led by the appellants-State to substantiate the true market value of the acquired land. The Collector while passing the Award has not referred to any document while determining the true market value of the acquired land. The basis and the material on which the market value of the acquired land was fixed by him is not on record.

13.With regard to the location as also the amenities available, even PW-1 who was the Patwari Halqua Beaulia, has deposed that the acquired land is recorded in the revenue record as Bakhal Doem. According to him, the land is at a distance of just 20 mtrs. from the road.

14.PW-3 has categorically deposed that the land is situated adjoining to the Shogi-Shimla Bye-Pas