IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RFA No. 409 & 411 of 2018 Reserved on: 06.03.2026 Decided on: 09.03.2026

1. RFA No. 409 of 2018:

The State of H.P. & another ....Appellants Versus f Purshottam Dev & another o …Respondents

2. RFA No. 411 of 2018:

The State of H.P. & another ....Appellants Versus Laiq Ram & anotheru …Respondents Coram:

The HonC’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 _________________________________________________

For the appellant(s): Mr. Ankush Thakur, Deputy Advocate General.

For the respondents: Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, Advocate, in RFA No. 409 of 2018 and Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate, in RFA No. 411 of 2018.

Sushil Kukreja, Judge.

Since both the these appeals are the offshoots of award relating to Land situated in village Racholi, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla, H.P., which was acquired for construction of approach road to new bus stand, through notification, dated 02.09.2008, issued by the Government of

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

H.P., under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short “the Act”), the same are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The instant appeals have been preferred by the appellant(s)/State against common award, dated 07.09.2017, passed in LAC Petitions No. 13-R/4 of2016/2012 and 15-R/4 of 2016/2012, passed by learned Additional District Judge Kinnaur, District at Rampur Bushahr, H.P. (for short “learned Reference Court”), with a prayer to set-aside the impugned award.

3. The facts giving rise to the instant appeals, in brief, are that Government of Himachal Pradesh published Notification, dated 02.09.2008, for acquiring land for the construction of approach road to new bus stand in village HRacholi, Tehsil Rampur, District Shimla, H.P., (for short “the acquired land”), and accordingly the land measuring 2-54-28 hectares in village Racholi was acquired. The said notification was published in two daily news papers, i.e., ‘Dainik Bhaskar’ and ‘Dainik Jagran’ on 15.09.2008. The land owners filed objections, but the same, being not tenable, were rejected. Subsequently, notification, dated 09.04.2009, was issued under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act, which was published in ‘Raj Patra’

on 20.04.2009 and in two daily news papers, i.e., ‘Divya Himachal’ and ‘Times of India’ on 21.04.2009. Inquiry was conducted and one year average market value of mauja Racholi was prepared by the revenue department and it was sent to District Collector, Shimla for approval and vide award, dated 04.02.2010, market value of the land was assessed as under:

4. On the basis of the above classification, the petitioners/claimants (respondents herein) were paid compensation. Forty trees of fruit bearing plants were also found on the acquired land and the valuation of the fruit trees was also included in the award. There was one structure over the acquired land, but assessment for the same was not received from the concerned department, therefore, it was not included in the award and it was observed that supplementary award will be made qua the said structure.

5. The petitioners/claimants feeling aggrieved filed present reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act before the learned Reference Court below and the learned Reference Court, after considering all the material, passed the impugned award, whereby the petitioners/claimants were held entitled for enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.2269.06 per square meter qua the acquired land, irrespective of its classification and in addition to it, petitioners in LAC Petition No. 13-R/4 of 2016/2012, titled as Purshottam Dev vs. LAC, were held entitle d to compensation of Rs.46,25,100/- for the structure on the acquired land, petitioners in LAC Petition No. 15-R/14 of 2016/2012, titled as Laiq Ram vs. LAC were held entitled to Hcompensation of Rs.3,12,100/- for the development works carried on the acquired land. The learned Reference Court also held the petitioners entit