JUDGMENT

(per Hon'ble The Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan)

Since common question of law and facts are involved in the above-numbered special appeal, the same are being taken up together and adjudicated by this common judgment.

2. The appellant has challenged the legality of the order, dated 06.01.2021, passed by a learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No.346 of 2016, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition, inter alia, on the ground that the application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act had to be filed within the period of limitation prescribed by the said provision. Since the application was filed after an inordinate delay, the writ petition could not be allowed. Hence, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petitions filed by the petitioner and others.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant claims to be the resident of Village Malideval, Pargana Udaipur, Tehsil and District Tehri Garhwal. According to him, the entire land i.e. 2805 Nali, 12 Mutthi lying in Village Malideval, Pargana Udaipur, Tehsil and District Tehri Garhwal, was acquired in the year 1993 under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act") for the purpose of Tehri Dam project. The notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 07.08.1993. Subsequently, a notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 10.09.1994. The compensation award was published on 31.03.2000. According to the award, compensation for irrigated land was @ Rs.2434.78 per Nali, Rs.1217.39 per Nali for the second category, and Rs.811.59 per Nali for un-irrigated land.

4. However, subsequently, by order dated 30.11.2004, the learned District Judge, Tehri Garhwarl concluded that the compensation awarded to the resident of Village Malideval is inadequate, and is, thus, liable to be enhanced. Therefore, the compensation was enhanced from Rs.2434.78 to Rs.27,000/- per Nali for irrigated land, from Rs.1217.39 to Rs.13,500/- per Nali for second category, and from Rs.811.59 to Rs.9,000/- per Nali for un-irrigated land.

5. Since the Tehri Hydro Development Corporation (for short “THDC") was aggrieved by the said order, it filed a First Appeal before this Court. By judgment dated 06.09.2006, this Court dismissed the appeal, and upheld the order dated 30.11.2004.

6. Aggrieved by the order dated 06.09.2006, the THDC filed SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, by judgment dated 26.03.2014, the Hon'ble Apex Court dismissed the said SLP.

7. Subsequent thereto, on 19.06.2014, the appellant writ petitioner moved an application under Section 28A of the Act requesting the respondents to pay enhanced compensation to him. The Collector, Land Acquisition, Tehri Garhwal, issued the notice to the THDC. On 12.08.2015, the THDC filed its objection, wherein it raised a contention that the said application is hit by limitation, as prescribed under Section 28A of the Act. By order dated 13.10.2015, the petitioner's application was dismissed. Hence, a large number of land owners, who had filed the applications under Section 28A of the Act, and whose applications were duly dismissed by the Collector, filed a large number of writ petitions before the learned Single Judge. By a common order dated 06.01.2021, the learned Single Judge dismissed all the writ petitions. Hence, the present appeals before this Court.

8. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, the learned Senior Counsel appearing of the appellant-writ petitioners, submits that since the matter was carried all the away upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and since the Hon'ble Supreme Court had dismissed the SLP filed by the THDC, the appellant was justified in filing his application under Section 28A of the Act only thereafter. Therefore, according to the learned Senior Counsel, the learned Single Judge was not justified in dismissing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners. Hence, the impugned order dated 06.01.2021 deserves to be set aside by this Court.

9. Heard the lear