JUDGMENT :

Easwaran S., J.

These appeals have presented before us certain unique facts.

On the one hand, the State as well as the requisitioning authority contend that the amount of compensation granted by the reference court is on the higher side, whereas on the other hand, the claimants contend that the amount fixed by the land acquisition officer is dismally low and it was therefore that the reference under Section 18 of the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was sought and the same was answered in their favour. The facts are unique in the sense that in respect of a single cause for land acquisition covered by one notification, land owners are differentiated on two different criteria; (a) the award passed under the erstwhile and (b) the award passed under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [Act 30 of 2013]. Different market values are fixed for the same category of lands acquired for the very same purpose albeit under two different enactments.

Facts of the case

2. A total extent of 105.27 hectares of land was sought to be acquired for establishment of a “Life Science Park” on request of the Kerala State