The compensation for land acquisition must reflect the prevailing market value based on sale deeds within three years prior to notification, not an arbitrary figure, ensuring just compensation under the Act of 2013.

JUDGMENT :

ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.

1. This batch of 118 first appeals arise out of common judgment dated 30.11.2024 wherein different Land Reference cases have been decided. The acquired land involved in these cases are of village Tarhesa, District Hazaribagh, Jharkhand which have been acquired under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2013) for NTPC limited. Total area of acquired land is 84.80 acres of raiyati land. There are 59 Land Reference cases involved in this batch of cases arising out of Land Reference Case No. 495 of 2022 to 540 of 2022 and Land Reference Case Nos. 555 of 2022 to 567 of 2022 arising out of the same Reference under section 64 of the aforesaid Act of 2013.

2. The District Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at flat rate of Rs. 4,823/- per decimal. As the claimants were dissatisfied with the rate of compensation, reference was made to the learned court under section 64 of the aforesaid Act of 2013 on 21^st May, 2022. By the impugned judgment, the compensation has been enhanced from Rs. 4823/- per decimal to Rs. 11,000/- per decimal. Both the parties, the claimants as well as NTPC Limited, are aggrieved by the impugned judgment. 59 cases have been filed by NTPC Limited and 59 cases have been filed by the claimants.

The trial court’s judgement.

3. The learned trial court framed the point for determination as under: - “whether the compensation awarded to the petitioners should be enhanced?”

The relevant findings of the learned trial court are as under: -

“15. Heard the argument of both the sides. In the light of argument, perused the entire materials available on record in which, I find that, P.W. 1 is Ramswarup Ojha. He is also applicant in L.A. Case no. 495/2022. In his cross- examination at para 26 he has stated that, the compensation for the acquired land was fixed by the government at the rate of Rs.4823/- per decimal. The land was acquired in the year 2019. The rate fixed by the government was based on the government rate of purchase and sale of land at that time. At para 48 he has stated that, he had given compensation at the said rate, but he had demanded @ Rs.20,000/- per decimal. P.W.2 is Manoj Kumar Ojha. He is also one of the applicant. In cross- examination at para 24, he has stated that, land was acquired by the government in the year 2019 and at that time, the government rate of the land of Tarhesa village was Rs.20,000/- per decimal, but he has not filed the paper of fixed government rate in the court. At para 39 he has stated that, some money has already been taken from the government for the land for which this case has been lodged to increase the rate. At para 48, he has stated that, the land that has been acquired is of both residential and agricultural type. P.W. 3 is Pankaj Lal Jaiswal. In cross- examination at para 15 he has stated that, he has purchased the land in village Tarhesa @ Rs.25,000/- per decimal and he can file the deed of the land. The nature of land acquired in village Tarhesa is Tand no.1 and not residential. I find that, sixteen sale deeds have been proved on behalf of the petitioners…………………………………….. I further find that, five documents have been proved on behalf of the opp. parties. Ext. A is Attested copy of order- sheet of L.A. Case no.01/2016-17, Ext. B is Attested copy of sale figure chart, Ext. C is Attested copy of estimate, Ext. D is Attested copy of rate report, Ext. E is Attested copy of valuation Khatiyan and Ext. F is Attested copy of N