IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
SUSHIL KUKREJA, J.
The Land Acquisition Collector - Appellant
Versus
Bangalu @ Daulat Ram - Respondent
RFA Nos. 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 of 2018
Decided On : 07-01-2025
(A) Land Acquisition Act - Sections 4, 6, and 18 - Acquisition of land for public purpose - Compensation awarded at uniform rate of Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha for all categories of land - Reference Court's decision upheld as no deduction permissible for road construction - Claimants entitled to uniform compensation irrespective of land classification. (Paras 5, 10, 16)
(B) Principle of uniform compensation - If entire land is acquired for the same public purpose, claimants are entitled to compensation at uniform rates regardless of categorization. (Paras 9, 10)
Facts of the case:
The appeals arise from an award concerning land acquired for the construction of Tepra-Kuhal Katal-Dabour road, with the Reference Court awarding compensation at Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha for all categories of land.
Findings of Court:
The Reference Court's award was justified as the land was acquired for a common public purpose, and no deductions were warranted.
Issues: The main issues were whether the Reference Court erred in awarding uniform compensation and whether deductions for development costs were necessary.
Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that uniform compensation is warranted when land is acquired for a singular public purpose, and deductions are not permissible in such cases.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Sushil Kukreja, J.
1. Since all the these appeals are the offshoots of award relating to Land situated in village Kuhal Katal, Post Office and Sub-Tehsil Namhol, District Bilaspur, H.P., which was acquired, through notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act”) for construction of Kuhal-Katal road, the same are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.
2. The instant appeals have been preferred by the appellant(s)/State against common award, dated 18.03.2017, passed in Land References No. 20/4 to 24/4 of 2013, passed by learned Additional District Judge Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (camp at Bilaspur) (for short “the Reference Court below”), with a prayer to set-aside the impugned award.
3. The facts giving rise to the instant appeals, in brief, are that Government of Himachal Pradesh published Notification, dated 27.08.2009, under Section 4 of the Act for acquiring land for the construction of Tepra-Kuhal Katal-Dabour road (for short “the acquired land”) in village Kuhal Katal, P.O. Namhol, District Bilaspur, H.P., and accordingly the land was acquired. Subsequently, notification, dated 18.06.2010, was issued under Section 6 of the Act, whereby objections were invited from the landowners. Ultimately, following the procedure prescribed under Section 8 of the Act, demarcation of the acquired land was carried out and the Land Acquisition Collector, after considering the available material as well as the objections, passed award, dated 09.12.2011, whereby market value of the land was assessed as under:
| S. No. | Class of land | Rate per bigha |
| 1. | Kuhli Awwal | Rs.8,50,000/- |
| 2. | Kuhli Dom | Rs.7,31,000/- |
| 3. | Anderli Awwal | Rs.6,29,000/- |
| 4. | Anderli Doam | Rs.5,27,000/- |
| 5. | Baharli Awwal | Rs.4,25,000/- |
| 6. | Baharli Doam | Rs.2,04,000/- |
| 7. | Banzar and Khadyetar | Rs.1,02,000/- |
4. The petitioners/claimants (respondents herein)were paid compensation on the aforesaid rates, which was received by them under protest and they preferred petitions under Section 18 of the Act before the Land Acquisition Collector, which were further referred to the learned Reference Court below.
5. The learned Reference Court below, after considering all the material, passed the impugned award, as mentioned hereinabove, whereby the petitioners/claimants were held entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha of the acquired land, irrespective of the classification or category of the land, alongwith interest and other statutory benefits.
6. Feeling dissatisfied, the appellants have preferred the instant appeals with a prayer that the impugned awards be set-aside.
7. The learned Deputy Advocate General has contended that Reference Court has fallen into error by enhancing the market value of the acquired land at the uniform rate of Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha for all categories of the acquired land. He further contended that while awarding the compensation at the flat rate of Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha, the learned Reference court did not allow the standard deduction as being a rural connectivity road constructed for the benefit of the land owners, the standard deduction between 33-53% was required to be made from the flat rate of Rs.8,50,000/- per bigha.
8. Conversely, it is contended on behalf of the claimants that since the land of the claimant was acquired for the same purpose, as such, the Reference Court has rightly awarded the compensation for the acquired land at the uniform rate, regardless of its categorization. It is further contended that the purpose of acquisition of the land was construction of a road, as such, no deduction was permissible.
9. It is not in dispute that the land of the claimants was acquired for the same purpose, i.e., for the construction of Tepra-Kuhal Katal-Dabour road in village Kuhal Katal, Post Office Namhol, District Bilaspur. It is well settled principle of law that if entire land is acquired for the same purpose, then the claimants are entitled for compensation for the acquired land at the uniform rate
Uniform compensation is mandated under the Land Acquisition Act when land is acquired for a common public purpose, irrespective of land classification.
Uniform compensation is applicable in land acquisition cases for public use, regardless of land categorization, and no deductions are permissible for public utility projects.
Uniform compensation is warranted for land acquired for the same public purpose, irrespective of land classification, with no deductions allowed for rural connectivity projects.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the relevance of sale instances/exemplars from the acquired land for determining the market value and the appropriateness of deductions towards dev....
Market value for acquired land must reflect the highest comparable sales, with deductions for development costs and interest calculated from possession date, not award date.
The court ruled that proper market value determination for acquired land must prioritize the highest bona fide transaction and that interest is owed from the date possession is taken, not from the da....
Court should look into sale instances of smaller pieces of land while applying reasonable element of deduction.
The highest sale instance must be considered for compensation valuation, and deductions for development charges must reflect the land's actual condition.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.