IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT

SHIMLA

RFA No. 31 of 2015

Reserved on: 17.11.2025 Date of decision: 05.12.2025

________________________________________________ Dev Raj & another. …..Appellants.

Versus

Union of India & others. f ……Respondents.

_________________________

_______________________

Coram

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

1 Whether approved for reporting?

For the appellants: Ms. Shashi Kiran, Advocate.

For respondents No. 1 to 3/

Union of India: Mr. Kunal Thakur, Central

o Government Counsel.

For Crespondent No. 4/State: Mr. Manoj Chauhan and Mr.

Amandeep Sharma, Additional Advocates General, with Mr. Ankush Thakur and Mr. Balvinder Singh Ballu, Deputy

Advocates General.

For respondents No. 5 to 9: Mr. K.S. Dhaulta and Ms.

Bhavya, Advocates.

Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

The instant appeal has been preferred by the

appellants, who were petitioners No. 1 and 2 before the learned Court below (hereinafter referred to as “the appellants”) under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”), against award dated 13.09.2013,

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

passed by learned District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as “the learned PReference Court”), in LAC Petition No. 08-LAC/4 of 2010, .whereby the petition filed by the petitioners/claimants, (appellants and proforma respondents No. 5 to 9 herein) under Section 18 of the Act was allowed and othey were held entitled for enhanced compensation a t the flat rate of Rs.350/- per square meter irresperctive of the classification of the land alongwith solatium, additional compensation, interest etc..

2. The brief facts of the case are that the land of the petitioners/claimants was acquired for the public purpose, i.e., for construction of Kala Amb-Nahan-Paonta Sahib- Dehradun National Highway. Notification under Section 4 of the Act, qua the acquisition of the land, was issued on 25.07.2007 and the same was published in Rajpatra on 18.08.2007 and also in two daily news papers, i.e., Divya Himachal on 12.08.2007 and Times of India on 12.08.2007. The Land Acquisition Collector, after inviting the objections and hearing the parties, announced the award considering one year average sale price, as was prevalent in the area prior to the publication of the aforesaid Notification under Section 4 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded the following rates for various categories of the land:

3. The petitioners/c laimants, feeling aggrieved with the award of the Lrand Acquisition Collector preferred a petition under Section 18 of the Act before the learned Reference Court for enhancement of the compensation maiCnly on the ground that the Land Acquisition Collector did not consider that the land was situated within the Municipal area of Paonta Sahib which is an industrial area coupled with the fact that Tehsil Headquarter and its boundaries touches Uttrakhand.

4. The learned Reference Court, allowed the petition of the petitioners/claimants and held them entitled for enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.350/- (rupees three hundred fifty) per square meter, irrespective of the classification of the land. In addition to the above, the petitioners were also held entitled to solatium, additional compensation, interest on the enhanced amount of compensation. Feeling still aggrieved, appellants Dev Raj and Paramjeet Kaur, who were petitioners No.P 1 and 2 before the learned Reference Court, preferred. the instant appeal under Section 54 of the Act with a prayer to allow the instant appeal by modifying the impugned award, dated 13.09.2013, and to determinoe the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.49 8/- per square meter, i.e., Rs.4,24,296/- per bighra wilh all other statutory benefits.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, learned Central Government Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3/Union of India, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No. 4/State and learned counsel for pro