Compensation for acquired land is based on market value and potentiality. A uniform rate applies regardless of soil classification if land is acquired as a single unit for a common purpose. Deductions for development are applicable based on the project's nature and actual development expenses incurred.

JUDGMENT :

Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

Since the instant appeals are offshoots of common award passed by learned Additional District Judge, Solan, H.P. Camp at Nalagarh (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Reference Court”), they are taken up together for consideration and disposal.

2. The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Himachal Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (HPSIDC), respondent No. 2 before the learned Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as “the appellant”) under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) against award dated 08.04.2009, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Solan, H.P. Camp at Nalagarh (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Reference Court”) in Reference Petitions No. 4-NL/4 of 2008/06 to 10-NL/4 of 2008/067, whereby the reference petitions filed by the petitioners/claimants (some of the respondents herein) under Section 18 of the Act, were allowed.

3. The facts giving to the instant appeals are that the petitioners laid challenge to Award No. 3 of 2004, passed by Land Acquisition Collector (SDO) Nalagarh, District Solan, H.P.. It was averred by the petitioners that vide notification dated 07.01.2004, which was issued under Section 4 of the Act, the land of the petitioners, situated in village Billanwali Labana, Tehsil Nalagarh, was intended to be acquired by HPSIDC for public purpose, i.e., development of industrial area. The aforesaid notification was published in H.P. Rajpatra on 31.01.2004 and published in Punjab Kesari and Indian Express on 04.02.2004. Subsequently, notification under Sections 6 & 7 was issued on 20.09.2004, whereby land, i.e., omeasuring 59-9 bighas, comprised in khasra No. 395C(00-13), 396(00-10), 397(04-04), 398(04-03) and 399(15- 12), kitas 5, total measuring 18-3 bighas, was deleted and the aforesaid notification was published in H.P. Rajpatra on 20.10.2004. Ultimately, the Land Acquisition Collector i announced the award.

3(a). The petitioner being dissatisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector preferred reference petitions before the learned Reference Court.

4. The learned Reference Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after examining the entire record, allowed the reference petitions of the petitioners/claimants and they were held entitled to compensation of the acquired land @ Rs.8,45,200/- per bigha with all the statutory benefits, i.e., solatium compulsory acquisition allowance and interest. Hence, the instant appeals preferred by the appellant (HPSIDC).

5. The learned Senior Counsel for the appellant(s) vehemently contended that while passing the impugned award the learned Reference Court had erred in enhancing the amount of compensation by determining the market value of the land in an arbitrary manner. He further contended that the learned Reference court had also erred in not applying the principle of deduction to the determined m arket value of the acquired land, despite the fact that various development activities had to be carried-out when the land was acquired for the development of the industrial area. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned award be set-aside by allowing all the instant appeals.

6. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel for the privates respondents (petitioners/claimants) supported the impugned award by submitting that the same is result of proper appreciation of both law and facts and does not need any interference by this Court. The appeals, being without merit, be dismissed.

7. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant(s), learned Senior Counsel for the private respondents (petitioners/claimants), learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent s/State and carefully examined the entire records.

8. As per the settled principle of law, compensation for the land acquired has to be determined at market value. Market value is the price that a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for the property having d