The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of development charges and compensation for acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Vijender Jain, J.

1. For establishment of new grain market, construction of Staff Quarters, Rest House, Gadda Sheds and office building at Meham. Government of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") on 8.10.1985 followed by another notification under Section 6 of the Act on 12.6.1986. These notifications were issued for acquiring 37 acres 6 kanals and 8 marlas of land in Meham, District Rohtak. However, in actual 24 acres 5 kanals and 19 marlas of the land was acquired and to this effect Land Acquisition Collector issued the award. In his award dated 30.9.1987 learned Land Acquisition Collector, Rohtak, depending upon the nature of land awarded following compensation to the land owners:

Nehri/Chahi land

Rs.25,000/- per acre

Gair Mumkin

Rs.28,000/- per acre

Barani Land

Rs.15,000/- per acre

Not satisfied with the amount of compensation, references under Section 18 of the Act were sought for enhancement of compensation. 21 references preferred were disposed of by learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak vide judgment dated 3.2.1990, who awarded uniform rate of compensation to all the claimants at the rate of Rs. 1,44,000/- per acre.

2 Against the judgment of learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak, 21 Regular First Appeals were filed by the State of Haryana praying that the amount awarded is excessive. Claimants also filed 20 appeals praying for enhancement. All the appeals were decided by the impugned judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court on 18.2.2000. The learned Single Judge came to conclusion that the claimants would get Rs. 3,68,000/-per acre minus 50% i.e. Rs. 1,84,000/-. 50% cut was applied for the development charges.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has also stated at bar before us that no other Letters Patent Appeal was preferred against the judgement of learned Single Judge except the present one. During course of arguments, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants has confined his arguments only to challenge imposition of 50% cut applied towards the development charges.

4. It is not disputed that the learned Additional District Judge before arriving at the amount of compensation had already applied 1/3rd cut for small piece and further 1/3rd cut on account of fact that entire land was not abutting the National Highway. In view of this, before the learned Single Judge, State had not pressed their appeals.

5. Assailing imposition of 50% cut for development charges etc. the learned Counsel for the appellant has heavily relied upon the evidence of PW.3, PW.4 and PW.6, which have been noticed by learned Single Judge to determine location and potential of the acquired land. In the impugned judgement the following portion of evidence of PW.3 has been noticed:

...Their evidence is material. PW.3 stated as under: The acquired land was surrounded by roads from three sides one of which is National Highway I.T.I., College, Tehsil Campus, Bus-stand, Power House and Arya Nagar are near to this place. This place was very valuable to us. At the time of acquisition the rate of the land was Rs. six lakhs per acre. Now the land near to our land is being sold from Rs. 500/-per square yard to Rs. 1,500/-per square yard. Due to this acquisition my land has been bifurcated into pieces and on this amount the value of my remaining land has been reduced.

6. After discussing the evidence of witnesses, the following findings have been returned by the learned Single Judge:

...The inescapable conclusion from the above discussion is that the acquired land has a reasonable potential and good location. Once the land in question is of that kind and even the part of the land is stated to be within Municipal Limits, it will be difficult for the Court to approve deduction of such high percentage. Reverting back to the sale deeds on record, the learned Reference Court could not have taken into consideration any other sale deeds except exhibit P.