A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.

1. ALL these matters involve common question. As a result, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment. The question is, whether successive application by the same claimant under Section 28A(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is maintainable?

2. THE brief facts leading to these matters are as follows:-

The State of Himachal Pradesh vide single Notification dated 20th October, 1984 acquired certain pieces of land, including that of the respondent(s) in appeals and the petitioner(s) in CMPMO (for short, "claimants herein"), situated in Village Tabba, Tehsil and District Una, HP, for construction of B.G. Railway line from Nangal Dam to Talwara. The Land Acquisition Collector announced the award on 15th May, 1986 and fixed the market value of different kinds of land as under:-

(a) Barani and Abadi Rs.4,000 per Kanal (b) Banjar Kadim Rs.2,000 per Kanal (c) Gair Mumkin Rs.1,000 per Kanal

3. REFERENCE Petition under Section 18 of the Act claiming higher compensation, on various grounds, was filed by several land owners other than the claimants herein. In all, six cases were registered separately as Land Reference Petitions No. 22 of 1987, 14 of 1987, 16 of 1987, 24 of 1987, 25 of 1987 and 27 of 1987 and were decided by the District Judge in terms of its award dated 27th May, 1988, who reassessed the value of land, in addition to statutory payment of solatium and interest, as under:-

(a) Barani and Abadi Rs.8,000 per Kanal (b) Banjar Kadim Rs.4,000 per Kanal (c) Gair Mumkin Rs.2,000 per Kanal

4. CLAIMANTS herein filed applications under Section 28A(1) of the Act claiming enhanced compensation on the basis of award dated 27th May, 1988 as passed in Reference Petition No. 22 of 1987. Based on the enhanced awarded amount, applications preferred by the claimants herein were allowed whereby they were also awarded enhanced compensation in terms of the award of the Court.

However, against the award dated 27th May, 1988 appeals were filed before this Court, which were decided vide judgment dated 16th May, 1997. This Court was pleased to set aside the said award and remanded the matter back to the District Judge for reconsideration.

5. AFTER remand, the Reference Petitions were separately decided by the District Judge on different dates. The last of the award dated 1.8.1998, arising out of the same notification, was passed by the District Judge in Land Reference No. 82 of 1987 titled Lachhman Dass. Vs. Collector. In terms of the said award dated 1st August, 1998, the compensation amount was enhanced by the learned District Judge as under:-

(a) Barani Rs.10,000 per Kanal

(b) Banjar Kadim Rs. 5,000 per Kanal

(c) Gair Mumkin khud and choe Rs. 2,500 per Kanal

6. THE claimants herein, relying on the subsequent award dated 1st August, 1998, moved fresh application(s) before the Collector, under Section 28A(1) of the Act for re- determination of compensation and for enhanced compensation. The second application, filed by the claimants herein, was dismissed by the Collector in terms of impugned order(s) dated 22nd March, 2003 on the ground that second application is not maintainable.

The claimants herein, being aggrieved, filed writ petitions before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The group of writ petitions were heard and disposed of by the learned Single Judge of this Court by a common judgment, dated 31st July, 2007. The learned Single Judge answered the question in favour of the claimants herein and held that in the facts of the present case, it was open to them to file second application(s) under Section 28A(1) for re-determination of the compensation, in view of the fresh award of the Court passed in the case of other claimants, which was more beneficial to them. The correctness of this view is put in issue.

7. THESE matters were notified in the consolidated list for the moth of May, 2013 at Sr. No. 4. The matters were called out for hearing on