The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of uniform compensation rates, the determination of severance charges, and the limitations on the grant of solatium as per the statutory provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

JUDGMENT

G.S. Sandhawalia, J. (Oral) - The present judgment shall dispose of above referred 200 appeals filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'), out of which 86 appeals have been filed by the landowners and 114 appeals have been filed by Union of India through Ministry of Railways (for short 'UOI'), who are aggrieved against the amounts awarded vide Awards dated 30.09.2009 and 01.10.2009 by the Reference Court, Fatehgarh Sahib.

2. In principle the Reference Court has granted 10% as severance charges on account of the fact that the land was acquired for construction of a Broad Gauge Railway Line from Chandigarh to Ludhiana. However, apart from that on the issue of solatium an additional 30% has been granted along with other statutory benefits along with amounts of Rs.6 lakhs and Rs.8 lakhs per acre, which has been granted by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the LAC). Resultantly, the UOI is aggrieved against the grant of 30% additional solatium which has been prescribed under the statute.

3. The notification in question was issued on 19.09.2005 by invoking the urgency provisions under Section 4 read with Section 17 (1) of Act, whereby the land was sought to be acquired of five villages measuring 104 acres 3 kanals 14 marlas. The details of the land acquired of the said villages is as under:-

4. The public purpose for which the land was acquired was for construction of New Broad Gauge Railway Line from Chandigarh to Ludhiana. Vide Award dated 18.08.2006, as noticed above in the table, the LAC had awarded Rs.8 lakhs per acre for village Khant and Sanghol, whereas for the other three villages Rs.6 lakhs per acre was awarded along with all other statutory benefits.

5. The landowners being aggrieved by the compensation granted, filed petition under Section 18 of the Act, claiming Rs.75 lakhs per acre. Apart from that they also sought additional amount on account of the bifurcation of the land on both sides of the railway line, due to which no source of irrigation was left on the southern side. It has been averred that there was no passage for use of the land on the other side of the railway line. The landowners of three villages, namely, Panjkoha, Bhattian and Panaichan sought compensation at the same amount, which was awarded to the landowners of village Sanghol and Khant, on the ground that they were similarly placed.

6. The Railways took the plea that adequate market value had been awarded and the District Collector had conducted a inquiry. There were provisions of pipeline along with the Railway Line, so that thepetitioners could get their land irrigated by that pipeline. The question that the land on the southern side of the railway line becoming barren does not arise. Sufficient arrangement had been made for ingress and egress to the land on both southern and northern side and the value of the land had not been diminished and there was no question of enhancement of the compensation.

7. For village Panaichan, while deciding 40 reference petitions, lead case of which was LR Petition No.5 of 2006 Major Singh vs. State of Punjab and others' decided on 30.09.2009, while the maintaining the compensation, it was noticed by the Reference Court, the land was at a distance of 11 to 12 Kms from Chandigarh-Ludhiana highway, as compared to the land of village Sanghol and Khant, which are just on the Chandigarh-Ludhiana highway and resultantly uniform compensation was declined. Sale deeds Ex.Pl to P8 were rejected on the ground that they were pertained to other villages namely Kalewal, Sanghol and Polomajra. Resultantly, sale deeds Ex.R22 to R29 pertaining to village in question and for the year 2004-2005 were kept into considerat