JUDGMENT :

Oswal, J.

1. The identical issues are involved in these writ petitions, as such, Ms. Monika Kohli, learned Senior AAG and Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI submit that response filed by them in WP(C) No. 1528/2020 be treated as response in the connected petition bearing OWP No. 2260/2018. Ordered accordingly.

2. With the consent of the learned Counsels appearing for the parties, these writ petitions are admitted and heard finally.

WP(C) No. 1528/2020

3. The facts are extracted from WP(C) No. 1528/2020. The prayer made by the petitioners in this writ petition is for directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to appoint Arbitrator under section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act read with Rule 9 of the Jammu and Kashmir Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Rules. Further prayer has been made for directing the Arbitrator to provide the interest @12% per annum on the compensation.

4. The land of the petitioners has been acquired under the Act (supra) for the defence purpose and as per the final assessment report prepared by respondent No. 3, rate of the land situated at Manda (Akhnoor) has been fixed as Rs. 3.50 lacs per Kanal and Rs. 3 lacs per kanal for village Dasgal. The petitioners claim to have received the amount under protest and have also filed an application for appointment of Arbitrator in terms of Rule 9 and section 8 (1) of the Act(supra). The grievance projected by the petitioners is that there was no agreement between the petitioners and the concerned authority under the Act (supra) and as such the respondent No. 3 is under statutory duty to appoint an Arbitrator.

5. Reply stands filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have admitted the acquisition of the requisitioned land measuring 700 Kanals 03 Marlas falling in Village Manda and Dasgal, Tehsil Akhnoor. Later, it was found that the land measuring 02 Kanals falling under Khasra No. 223-Min of Village Manda was not required to be included for acquisition and further the land measuring 03Marlas comprising Khasra No. 608 of Village Dasgal was consumed in the construction of road, so 02 Kanals and 03 Marlas of land out of the total 700 Kanals and 04 Marlas of land was deleted. They also pleaded that the land has already been assessed at a higher value and as such, no enhanced compensation is required to be paid to the petitioners.

6. Response stands also filed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 wherein, it has been pleaded that vide Final Assessment Report dated 23.07.2014, the rate for acquisition of the land in question was fixed by the Committee of the Collectors attended by 08 Collectors and DEO Udhampur. It was also stated that the land owners had given their consent and willingness on the payment of compensation and notices have been served to the land owners by the revenue staff. It is also admitted by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 that no agreement under section 8 of the Act (supra) is required as the whole process of acquisition was completed taking into consideration the willingness and consent of the land owners. As per the response, rate of compensation was fixed at Rs. 03.50 lacs per Kanal for Manda and Rs. 3 lacs for Dasgal. It is also stated that in an identical matter, respondent No. 4 has rejected the application for appointment of Arbitrator that was required to be considered by respondent No. 4 in terms of direction issued in OWP No. 1448/2018.

7. Heard and perused the record.

8. From the record, it transpires that the compensation has been fixed as per the Final Assessment Report @ Rs.3.50 lacs per Kanal for land situated at Village Manda and @ Rs.3.00 lacs per Kanal for land situated at Dasgal. It is stated by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that a sum of Rs.22,52,02,500/- was released by the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu as acquisition cost as per the assessment carried out by the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu for disbursement to the land owners. From the record, it is evident that no agreement has been reac