142 (18 cases)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 2821 of 2018 (O&M)

and “17” connected cases Date of Decision: 21.01.2026 Jai Hind and others ...Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Narender Yadav, Advocate;

Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate;

Mr. Ashok Tyagi, Advocate;

Mr. Lakshya Saini, Advocate for Mr. Gurinder Pal Singh, Advocate; Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate;

Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate;

Ms. Sheenu Sura, Advocate; Mr. Pankaj Yadav, Advocate;

Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate; Mr. Gaurav Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant(s)-landowner(s).

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents / State of Haryana.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

This order shall dispose off the present eighteen appeals bearing RFA Nos. 3228, 3836, 3837, 3838, 3947, 4552, 5241 & 5496 of 2017; RFA Nos. 71, 170, 331, 2245 & 2821 (lead case) of 2018; 2537 of 2019; 551 & 926 of 2020; 991 of 2023; and 1242 of 2025, as the same arise out of common acquisition / award.

[2] All these appeals have been filed by the landowners, whereby they are seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Since the common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals, therefore, for the sake of convenience, facts are being culled out from RFA No. 2821 of 2018.

[3] The appellants-landowners, by instituting the appeal bearing RFA-2821-2018, preferred under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “1894 Act”), seek modification of the award dated 05.04.2017 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurugram (hereinafter to be referred as “Reference Court”), while claiming enhancement of compensation amount.

[4] Briefly stating, certain land owned by the appellants situated within the revenue estate of Village Dhorka, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, came to be acquired vide notifications dated 12.06.2012 and 10.06.2013 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively, for the public purpose namely “for the development and utilization of land for 66KV and 220 KV Electric Sub Station Sites and other public utility purpose in Sectors 76-77-78 and Sectors 81 to 95 at Gurgaon”. Vide Award No. 85, dated 31.07.2013, the Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon (for short “LAC’) determined the value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,10,00,000/- (One Crore Ten Lakhs only) per acre for all types of land.

[5] Aggrieved of the aforesaid Award dated 31.07.2013, landowners / interested persons filed reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which were partly accepted vide decision dated 05.04.2017 by the learned Reference Court, whereby the market value of the entire land was assessed at the rate of Rs. 1,79,00,553/- per acre alongwith other statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision of the learned Reference Court, the present appeal(s) have been preferred at the instance of appellant(s)-

landowner(s).

[6] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book.

[7] A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference Court while making assessment of market value @ Rs. 1,79,00,553/- per acre, relied upon an award dated 30.07.2014 (Exhibit P-6) passed by the then learned Reference Court with regard to acquisition in the same village-Dhorka, where the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was issued on 11.02.2010, i.e. prior to the notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the present case (i.e. 12.06.2012). Admittedly, vide award dated 30.07.2014 (Exhibit P-6), the then learned Reference Court determined the market value of the land in respect of same village to the tune of Rs. 1,39,87,202/- per acre. It may also be noticed here that the purpose of acquisition in both the acquisitions arising out of notifications dated 11.02.2010 and 12.06.2012 issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, has been the same i.e. “for the utilization of land for Sector Roads for Sectors 81 to Sector 9