By the Court.—This is a First Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against the judgment and order dated 10.11.2008, passed by the Additional District Judge/Prescribed Authority, Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal, Lucknow in Land Acquisition Misc. Case No. 30 of 2004. By the impugned award, learned tribunal has enhanced the compensation from Rs. 5.70 per sq. ft. to Rs. 23.75 per sq.ft. Feeling aggrieved with the enhancement of compensation, the appellant State has preferred the present appeal.

2. A land measuring 0.446 hectare of Khasra No. 954, situate at Aurangabad, Pergana, Bijnore, District Lucknow was acquired by the State Government for expantion of Lucknow Airport at Amausi. The Land Acquisition Officer in pursuance to the power conferred by Section 18 of the Act awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 5.70 per sq. ft which was enhanced to Rs. 23.75/- per sq. ft by the tribunal is the subject-matter of dispute before this Court in the present appeal.

3. Mr. D.K. Pathak, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel while assailing the impugned award submits that in the nearby place where a land was purchased for literacy house, the sale-deed was executed at the rate of Rs. 5.70 per sq.ft, hence the Land Acquisition Officer has rightly awarded the compensation at the rate of Rs. 5.70 per sq.ft.

4. On the other hand, attention of this Court has been invited by the Learned counsel for the respondent to the finding recorded by the tribunal which reveals that there were three sale-deeds executed in the same vicinity at the rate of Rs. 23.75 per sq.fit. One other sale-deed was executed at the rate of Rs. 20 per sq.ft. Further submission is that Literary House is far away than the acquired land. The learned counsel for the respondents states that the circle rate is Rs. 80 per sq.ft and accordingly, the compensation should have been enhanced to Rs. 80 per sq.ft and also keeping in view the recent trend with regard to payment of compensation to the farmers. It is further submitted that the respondent land holder shall be deprived of the the source of livelihood in case he is not given the reasonable compensation to meet out his requirement, the family members will not be able to generate alternative source of livelihood. Even the rate of Rs. 23.75 per sq. ft is on lower side since the circle rate of the area is Rs. 80 per sq.ft.

5. After considering the argument of the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the tribunal has rightly awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 23.75 per sq.ft. The respondent farmer has been deprived of the source of livelihood due to acquisitioning of his land for the construction of airport at the outskirt of Lucknow on Lucknow-Kanpur Road. Lucknow-Kanpur Road is hardly less than one kilometre from the land in question. It further borns out from the finding recorded by the tribunal that at a short distance of the land in question on other side, Bangla Bazar is situated and to nearby land in question, the facility of telephone, primary school and all other infrastructure are available. In Aurangabad, there is electricity connection also and there are Government handpumps for drinking water. Keeping in view the infrastructure available in the vicinity of the land in question and immediate or immediate future prospect, the rate of land should be much higher than what has been awarded by the tribunal. Once the circle rate of the land is Rs. 80 per sq.ft notified by the District Magistrate, then the payment of compensation at the rate of Rs. 23.75 per sq.ft seems to be not on higher side but it is on lower side.

6. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case in Hirabai and others v. Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Assistant Commissioner, 2010 (10) SCC 492, held that while determining the market value of cultivated land, the value of irrigated lands would be taken as about one and half times the value of dry lands and their Lordships upheld the finding recorded by the High Court.

7. In Iyasa