J U D G M E N T

The appeal by the Special Thasildar(Land Acquisition) BHEL Unit, Ranipet is against the award passed by the Reference Court fixing enhanced compensation of Rs.1,200/- per cent as against the compensation of Rs.32/-

per cent fixed by the Acquisition Authority.

2.The land, which is the subject matter of this appeal, is part of vast extend of land acquired for establishing BHEL at Ranipet. The Section 4(1) Notification for acquisition of the 10.13 acres of land was issued on

20/05/1981. Award No.25/1982 was passed on 22/11/1981. Against the said award of granting Rs.32/- per cent, the respondents herein, who held 10.08 acres sought reference for higher compensation of Rs.1,500/- per cent land and in addition Rs.2,73,000/- towards the cost of construction and Rs.2 crores for the loss of presumptive income. Later, the compensation claimed for land amended to Rs.3,600/- per cent.

3.The Reference Court, considering the fact that prior to Section 4(1)

Notification, an extent of 24.89 acres of land was pooled together by the first respondent company from various land holders and got consolidated to start a distillery. It has obtained license to commence the industries and quota for molasses which is one of the main raw material. It has also commenced construction in the land. In view of the notification, the claimant/first respondent lost part of the land and also forced to relocate its industry. The Acquisition Authority failed to consider the fact that the land acquired is an industrial land. The market value of the land ascertained on the presumption that it is 'manavari punja land' based on the classification made few decades ago unmindful of the fact that the land held by the claimant for industry purpose. Further, the fixation of value based on data sale which took place on 16/03/1979, for the acquisition Notification under Section 4(1) dated 20/05/1981 is not a proper data, since it fail to reflect the market value on the date of Notification.

4.The Reference Court, therefore, taking note of the title deed of the claimants and the data sales produced by the claimants, took the mean average and fixed the value of the land at Rs.1,200/- per cent for 10.08 acres of land held by the claimant/first respondent.

5.The said fixation of market value is under challenge in this appeal.

The reading of the grounds of appeal filed in cyclostyle form contains several grounds totally irrelevant to the facts of the case, which in view of this Court deserves the appeal to be dismissed with exemplary costs for preferring appeal recklessly adverting to facts totally unconnected and irrelevant to the case in hand. However, this Court inclined to hear the appeal, since the learned Additional Government Pleader apologies for the error and pleaded to place his submission primarily on the legal aspect namely the omission to deduct development charges from the market value fixed, which is mandatory and approved by catena of judgements of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court and on the other supplementary grounds that, the data sale considered by the authority reflects the true market value of the land in that area. The land acquired is land surrounded by cultivable land and far from residential and industrial area. No amenities like railway station, Highways etc. are nearby this land. There is no prospect of raise in price of the land.

6.The learned counsel for the first respondent/ claimant submitted that, deduction of development charges between 33.3% to 53% is not mandatory. The deduction for development will arise only if the land acquired is barren, uneven and unfit and the data value of developed land is relied for fixation of market value. Then only the requirement to deduct development charges will arise. In the instant case, the land acquired is a well developed industrial land and it was acquired to establish some another industry. When on fact, no further development is required, development charge need not be deducted. The data