Uniform compensation is warranted for land acquired for the same public purpose, irrespective of land classification, with no deductions allowed for rural connectivity projects.

JUDGMENT :

Sushil Kukreja, J.

1. Since both these appeals are the offshoots of award relating to Land situated in village Sehloon, Post Office 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 Tepra-Kuhal Katal-Dabourroad, 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. 25/4 and 26/4 of 2018, 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 25.11.2009, 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 Sehloon, P.O. Namhol, District Bilaspur, H.P., and accordingly the land was acquired. Subsequently, notification, dated 14.01.2011, 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 No. 15, dated 09.12.2011, whereby market value of the land was assessed as under:

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.7,97,134/- 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.7,97,134/- per bigha for all categories of the acquired land. He further contended that while awarding the compensation at the flat rate of Rs.7,97,134/- 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.7,97,134/- 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 Sehloon, 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, regardless of its categorization. R