Co-owners of jointly acquired land entitled to same judicially determined enhanced compensation as awarded to one co-owner via reference and appeal, even without own application under Section 18 or 28A, to ensure substantial justice and avoid technical discrimination.

JUDGMENT :

BIPIN CHANDER NEGI, J.

1. By way of the present writ petition, the following reliefs have been sought:-

“b) That the respondents be directed to pay the full and correct market value and compensation to the petitioner and respondent No.3 for their acquired land inherited from Sh. Kali Ram at the rate of Rs.48,400/- per bigha along with statutory benefits, in the same manner as has been done in the case of persons whose land was acquired under the same notification under Section 4 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894.

c) That Section 18 as well as Section 28A of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT may kindly be declared to be invalid and unconstitutional to the extent that the limitation prescribed therein for filing an application for seeking a reference or for payment of the correct market value of the acquired land is violative of the mandate of Article 31-A-(1) 2nd Proviso of the Constitution of India and these provisions of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT may kindly be quashed and held unconstitutional and invalid to this extent and the petitioner and proforma respondent may be declared to be entitled to receive the true and correct compensation for their acquired land.”

2. In view of the judgment delivered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 3803 of 2010, titled Mohammad Ali Vs. Land Acquisition Collector , whereby vires of Section 18 as well as Section 28-A of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (for the purpose of brevity hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) were upheld to the extent of limitation prescribed therein, the petitioners have limited the relief claimed in the writ petition only to receive compensation. The same is evident from order dated 22.08.2025.

3. In the case at hand, the lands of Sh. Bahu Ram and Sh. Kali Ram, sons of Phindu, had been acquired by respondent No.1 for setting up the Ghanvi Hydel Power Project in Village Ghanvi, Rampur Busahr, HP. They both had an equal share in the land acquired, which is the subject matter of the present case.

4. Notification for acquisition under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 08.09.1988. After following the procedure laid down under the law. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short “LAC”) had passed an award under Section 11 of the Act on 20.11.1991. In the Award made by the LAC, dated 20.11.1991, Sh. Bahu Ram was awarded Rs.1,35,671/- whereas Sh. Kali Ram was awarded Rs.1,35,672/-. The LAC had determined the market value of the acquired land on the basis of classification of land.

5. Feeling aggrieved by the Award passed by the LAC, Sh. Bahu Ram along with 15 other land-owners had filed a land Reference bearing No.19-R/4 of 1997, under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference made by the LAC was heard and decided by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur at Rampur, HP. Vide award dated 07.03.2003, the District Judge had enhanced the compensation and had granted a uniform rate for the land acquired irrespective of the classification of land. The District Judge in the Reference had determined the market value of the land in question at approximately Rs.88,000/- per bigha.

6. During the pendency of the Reference Petition, Sh. Bahu Ram had died on 09.11.1998. Subsequent to his death, the original petitioner, proforma respondent No.4, Kedar Singh, Nirma Devi and Kamla Devi had filed an application for being impleaded as sons and daughters of late Sh. Bahu Ram. Along with the application so filed, a certificate issued by the Block Development O