Chairman, Jawahar Nagar ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2001 Latest Caselaw 557 Bom

JUDGMENT

S. Radhakrishnan, J.

1. These two First Appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. First Appeal No. 159 of 1991 challenges the award passed by the Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference No. 37 of 1984 dated 18th October, 1989 whereby challenging the amount enhanced in the said reference to be not adequate. The State of Maharashtra has also filed First Appeal No. 546 of 1991 against the same award passed by the Reference Court on 18th October, 1989 challenging the enhancement granted as well as the amount computed at the rate of 12% p.a. under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act with regard to the period mentioned in the said Order. Similarly, the State of Maharashtra has also challenged the interest awarded at the rate of 9% p.a. as per section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act with regard to the period involved in the said oder as well as grant of interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on solatium and the amount at the rate of 12% p.a. as per section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in addition to the market value. Whereas the State of Maharashtra is not disputing the award of interest on the market valued but the award of interest on solatium and compensation at the rate of 12% p.a. as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act.

2. Brief facts are that the said Jawahar Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Limited of Village Kamothe, Taluka Panvel, District Raigad, was owning various plots of land in the said village Kamothe, the details of which are given in the Award dated 22nd September, 1983 passed in the above matter. There is no dispute about the ownership of the lands in the above case. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 3rd February, 1970 whereby various lands were sought to be acquired including the land with which we are concerned. By the said Notification dated 3rd February, 1970, New Bombay Project was sought to be created whereby 96 villages from Panvel and Thane District were sought to be acquired and the aforesaid village Kamothe was also included on the said project. It appears that some of the lands involved in these cases are Paddy lands and some of the lands are to the West of Sion-Panvel Highway. These lands have been purchased by the Appellant/Society from various persons and mostly from tenants. Notification under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on 25th July, 1972. Thereafter the land acquisition proceedings for determination of compensation were initiated. Before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the said society had claimed Rs. 10/- per sq. metre by way of compensation. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, after a detailed inquiry, finally by award dated 22nd September, 1983 found that the Society was entitled to a total amount of compensation payable at Rs. 5,65,009.75 p.a. for the lands acquired. The said compensation included the market value of the lands computed to Rs. 3,77,375/- as well as the valuation of Trees, crops, constructions, well, Sewerage charges, 15% Solatium, improvement charges and interest from 23rd March, 1973 and 17th April, 1973 to 25th September, 1973 at the rate of 4% per annum. It may be noted here that possession of part of the lands of the appellant Society was surrendered voluntarily by the appellant Society on 23rd March, 1973, and the possession of the balance lands were surrendered by the appellant Society to the State Government on 17th April, 1973. Therefore, the interest was computed with regard to certain lands from 23rd March, 1973 and with regard to the balance land from 17th April, 1973. It may also be noted here that after the said lands were voluntarily surrendered, on 16th May, 1973 an ad hoc amount of Rs. 2,01,900/- had been paid to the appellant Society, which was to be deducted from the total compensation awarded with regard to the lands. By the said Award, the Special Land Acquisition Officer calculated the interest also at the rate of 4% p.a., as per section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, from 23rd March, 1973 and 17th April, 1973 to 25th September, 1973, and it has computed the said compensation on that basis. The appellant Society, thereafter, being not satisfied with the compensation that has been awarded, preferred a reference application under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for an additional compensation.

3. The Reference Court being the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Raigad at Alibag, by an Order dated 18th October, 1989 has decided the said Land Acquisition Reference No. 37 of 1984 and has computed the market value at Rs. 15/- per sq. metre. The appellant Society had claimed Rs. 10/- per sq. metre before the said Reference Court initially and whereas, Rs. 20/- per sq. metres was added by way of amendment before the Reference Court totalling to an amount of Rs. 30/- per sq. metre. Therefore the appellant Society had claimed Rs. 30/- per sq. metre in the said reference. The Reference Court after considering all these facts and circumstances had increased the said compensation to Rs. 15/- per sq. metre. It may also be noted here that before the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the appellant Society had claimed Rs. 10/- per sq. metre whereas, the Special Land Acquisition Officer had awarded only Rs. 3.50 per sq. metre for the valuation in one group and Rs. 4.00 per sq. metre for valuation in other group depending upon the situation of various lands. The Reference Court, ultimately, granted the compensation to the appellant Society by computing the market value of Rs. 15/- per sq. metre from the date of notification in respect of the lands involved. The Reference Court had awarded a total sum of Rs. 16,09,950/- for the area of 107330 sq. metres at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. metre. Similarly, the Reference Court had granted 30% Solatium on the market value, as provided under section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, amounting to Rs. 4,82,985/-.

4. The Reference Court also had computed the amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as per section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act from the date of publication of the Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act i.e. 3rd February, 1970 till the date of Award of the Collector i.e. dated 22nd September, 1983. Here the Reference Court had proceeded on a footing that the possession was handed over on 30th September, 1983 and the Award was passed on 22nd September, 1983. Therefore, 22nd September, 1983 was taken as an earlier date than that of the date taking over possession. Accordingly, the Reference Court had awarded the compensation at the rate of 12% p.a. as per section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act from 4th February, 1970 (i.e. 3rd February, 1970) till 22nd September, 1983 (164 months) amounting to Rs. 26,40,318/-

5. As far as the interest at the rate of 9% p.a. that has been awarded under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is concerned, the Reference Court has computed the same with effect from 30th September, 1983 i.e. from the date of taking over possession and the date of the Reference Court's order dated 18th October, 1989 (i.e. for a period of 73 months) on the market value of Rs. 16,09,950/- plus solatium Rs. 4,82,985/- plus the amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as per section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, which comes to Rs. 26,40,318/- totaling to Rs. 47,33,238/- less the amount already awarded in the sum of Rs. 5,65,009.75ps., that figure comes to Rs. 41,68,243.25ps. on which the interest at the rate of 9% p.a. was calculated, and the same comes to Rs. 22,82,112.86ps.

6. Mr. Tated, the learned A.G.P. had contended that the amount awarded at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. metre by the Reference Court was excessive, whereas what was awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, i.e. at Rs. 3.50 and Rs. 4.00 per sq. metre, was the correct compensation. Secondly, the learned A.G.P. had contended that the amount at the rate of 12% as provided under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, as mentioned in Item No. 3 in paragraph 7 of the order of the Reference Court should be from 3rd February, 1970 till 23rd March, 1973 with regard to certain lands which the respondents have voluntarily surrendered and with regard to the balance lands from 3rd February, 1970 till 17th April, 1973 being the date on which the respondents have surrendered the possession voluntarily. Therefore, the contention of the learned A.G.P. is that the computation of the amount at the rate of 12% p.a. as provided under section 23(1-A) of the Act from 4th February, 1970 till 22nd September, 1983 was totally erroneous. The learned A.G.P. further contends that the Reference Court had erred in holding that the possession was taken on 30th September, 1983, whereas possession was voluntarily surrendered by the claimant on 23rd March, 1973 with regard to certain lands and balance lands on 17th April, 1993. The third contention of the learned A.G.P. is with regard to the Item No. 4 wherein interest at the rate of 9% p.a. as per section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act has been computed from 30th September, 1983 till the date of Reference Court award. The learned A.G.P. contends that, with regard to Item No. 4, in paragraph (7) of the Reference Court's order the amounts of solatium at Rs. 4,82,985/- and the amount at the rate of 12% p.a. as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act at Rs. 26,40,318/- and the market value for the purpose of computing interest at the rate of 9% p.a. per section 28 of the Act were impermissible in view of certain Apex Court's decisions. That is to say the learned A.G.P. contends that the interest at the rate of 9% p.a. as per section 28 of the Act should be computed only with regard to the market value from the date of taking over possession till the date of award dated 22nd September, 1983.

7. Learned Counsel for the respondent-claimant strongly contended that the amount awarded at Rs. 15/- per sq. metre by the Reference Court was inadequate and that the claimant was entitled to Rs. 30/- per sq. metre. Secondly, learned Counsel for the claimant contended that as far as the amount at the rate of 12% p.a. as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act is concerned, it should be awarded upto the date of the award i.e. 22nd September, 1983, which has been rightly awarded by the Reference Court. Learned Counsel for the claimants also contended with regard to Item No. 4 in paragraph 7 of its order the Reference Court had rightly computed the interest at the rate of 9% per annum as per section 28 of the Act adding solatium and the amount at the rate of 12% per annum as also the market value as per section 23(2) of the Act.

8. Having heard learned Counsel for the claimant as well as the learned A.G.P. for the State, to decide the contentions raised hereinabove, it is relevant to quote some of the sections of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, i.e. sections 17, 23(1-A), 28 and 34, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Section 17 reads as under :

"17. Special powers in cases of urgency.---(1) In cases of urgency, whenever the (appropriate Government) so directs, the Collector, though no such award has been made, may, on the expiration of fifteen days from the publication of the notice mentioned in section 9, sub-section (1), (take possession of any land needed for public purpose.) Such land shall thereupon (vest absolutely in the (Government)), free from all encumbrances.

(2) Whenever, owing to any sudden change in the channel of any navigable river or other unforeseen emergency, it becomes necessary for any Railway Administration to acquire the immediate possession of any land for the maintenance of their traffic or for the purpose of making thereon a river-side or Ghat station, or of providing convenient connection with or access to any such station, (or the appropriate Government considers it necessary to acquire the immediate possession of any land for the purpose of maintaining any structure or system pertaining to irrigation, water supply, drainage, road communication or electricity) (the Collector may, immediately after the publication of the notice mentioned in sub-section (1) and with the previous sanction of the (appropriate Government), enter upon and take possession of such land, which shall thereupon (vest absolutely in the Government)) free from all encumbrances:

Provided that the Collector shall not take possession of any building or part of a building under this sub-section without giving to the occupier thereof at least forty-eight hours notice of his intention so to do, or such longer notice as may be reasonably sufficient to enable such occupier to remove his movable property from such building without unnecessary inconvenience.

(3) In every case under either of the preceding sub-sections the Collector shall at the time of taking possession offer to the persons interested compensation for the standing crops and trees (if any) on such land and for any other damage sustained by them caused by such sudden dispossession and not excepted in section 24; and, in case such offer is not accepted, the value of such crops and trees and the amount of such other damage shall be allowed for in awarding compensation for the land under the provisions herein contained.

(3-A) Before taking possession of any land under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), the Collector shall, without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (3),---

(a) tender payment of eighty per centum of the compensation for such land as estimated by him to the persons interested entitled thereto, and

(b) pay it to them, unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in section 31, sub-section (2),

and where the Collector is so prevented, the provisions of section 31, sub-section (2), (except the second proviso thereto), shall apply as they apply to the payment of compensation under that section.

(3-B) The amount paid or deposited under sub-section (3-A), shall be taken into account for determining the amount of compensation required to be tendered under section 31, and where the amount so paid or deposited exceeds the compensation awarded by the Collector under section 11, the excess may, unless refunded within three months from the date of the Collector's award, be recovered as an arrears of land revenue.

(4) In the case of any land to which, in the opinion of the (appropriate Government), the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) are applicable, the (appropriate Government) may direct that the provisions of section 5-A shall not apply and, if it does so direct, a declaration may be made under section 6 in respect of the land at any time (after the date of the publication of the notification) under section 4, sub-section (1).)"

Section 23(1-A) reads as under:

"((1-A) In addition to the market-value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market-value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub-section (1), in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.

Explanation.---In computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any Court shall be excluded.)

(2) In addition to the market-value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of (thirty per centum) on such market-value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition."

Section 28 read as under:---

"28. Collector may be directed to pay interest on excess compensation.---If the sum which, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of (nine per centum) per annum from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess into Court:

(Provided that the award of the Court may also direct that where such excess or any part thereof is paid into Court after the date of expiry of a period of one year from the date on which possession is taken, interest at the rate of fifteen per centum per annum shall be payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of such excess or part thereof which has not been paid into Court before the date of such expiry.)"

Section 34 reads as under:

"34. Payment of interest.---When the amount of such compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate of (nine per centum) per annum from the time of so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited:

Provided that if such compensation or any part thereof is not paid or deposited within a period of one year from the date on which possession is taken, interest at the rate of fifteen per centum per annum shall be payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of compensation or part thereof which has not been paid or deposited before the date of such expiry."

9. As far as the first contention of the learned Government Pleader that the Reference Court had awarded Rs. 15/- per sq. metre was on an excessive side and it could only be at Rs. 3.50 or Rs. 4.00/- per sq. metre is concerned, we have perused the judgment of the Reference Court as also judgment delivered by the Division Bench of our High Court in First Appeal No. 382 of 1984, State of Maharashtra v. Bama Balu Tembhe, and other connected First Appeals dated 19th March, 1987, wherein, the Division Bench of our High Court was concerned with the acquisition of the lands pertaining to the same notification dated 3rd February, 1970 issued under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In the said judgment the learned Judges of our High Court have dealt with the acquisitions pertaining to the villages Kamothe, Kalamboli and Asudgaon, which are to the North of Panvel, and while dealing with the lands from the village Kamothe, in the said judgment, the learned Judges have referred to the Land Acquisition Reference No. 4 of 1985 wherein the Reference Court had awarded Rs. 15/- per sq. metre which was after the order of the High Court in First Appeal No. 449 of 1986. In the aforesaid Division Bench judgment dated 19th March, 1987 while dealing with different plots of lands from village Kamothe, the Division Bench had found that, the rates at Rs. 14/- per sq. metre, Rs. 12/- per sq. metre and Rs. 16/- per sq. metre, were to be a fair price taking into account the actual situation of the plots of lands concerned, that is to say, by and large, the Division Bench came to a conclusion that the rates of the plots of land from the said village Kamothe could be from Rs. 12/- to Rs. 16/- per sq. metre and in case of many of the plots, the amounts awarded were at Rs. 14/- or Rs. 16/- per sq. metre. The learned A.G.P. was unable to show any evidence to the contrary to hold that the valuation should be at Rs. 3.50ps. or Rs. 4/- per sq. metre. Similarly, learned Counsel for the claimant also could not show any material from the record other than the rates fixed at Rs. 15/- per sq. metre. The learned A.G.P. as well as learned Counsel for the claimant were unable to show, in the instant case, any material to hold otherwise than the price fixed at Rs. 15/- per sq. metre. Even the valuation report which is relied upon in these proceedings indicates the figure at Rs. 14/- to Rs. 18/- per sq. metre. Under these circumstances, we do not find any flaw in the computation of market value by the Reference Court at Rs. 15/- per sq. metre with regard to the area of 107330 sq. metres involved in the present appeal.

10. As far as the second issue is concerned, that is raised by the learned A.G.P. with regard to Item No. 2 in paragraph 7 of the order of the Reference Court, i.e. dealing with the amount at the rate of 12% per annum as provided under section 23(1-A) of the Act, is concerned, the contention of the learned A.G.P. is that the amount ought to be calculated not from 4th February, 1970 but from 3rd February, 1970 being the date of publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and till the date of taking over possession or the date of the Award, whichever is earlier, as laid down in section 23(1-A) of the said Act. The learned A.G.P. submits that in the instant matter, some of the lands are voluntarily surrendered by the claimant on 23rd March, 1973 and remaining lands were surrendered by the claimant voluntarily on 17th April, 1973. The learned A.G.P., therefore, contends that the amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as provided under section 23(1-A) of the said Act, should be from 3rd February, 1970 till 23rd March, 1973 with regard to the lands which were surrendered on that date and similarly, the said amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act should be from 3rd February, 1970 till 17th April, 1973 with regard to the balance lands which were surrendered subsequently. Therefore, the learned A.G.P. contends that the calculation made by the Reference Court upto 22nd September, 1983 was totally erroneous, inasmuch as, the Reference Court had wrongly proceeded on a basis that the possession was taken only on 30th September, 1983. We have perused the original records. From the records, it appears that the claimant had actually surrendered the possession of certain lands on 23rd March, 1973 and the possession of the remaining lands were surrendered by the claimant voluntarily on 17th April, 1973. Whereas, on 22nd September, 1983, it appears that the State Government had handed over possession of the said lands to CIDCO which had been acquired by the State Government. What we are concerned is with regard to the surrender and handing over of the possession by the claimant and not the date on which the said lands were handed over by the State Government to CIDCO. Therefore, we are in full agreement with the learned A.G.P. that the amount at the rate of 12% per annum as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act has to be calculated from the date of publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the Act i.e. 3rd February, 1970 till 23rd March, 1973 with regard to the lands surrendered on that date. Similarly, it has to be calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. under section 23(1-A) from 3rd February, 1970 till 17th April, 1973. We do not agree with the contention of learned Counsel for the claimant that the amount should be computed till 22nd September, 1983 being the date of the Award. A bare reading of section 23(1-A) of the said Act itself makes it abundantly clear that the interest has to be awarded from the date of publication of the notification under section 4(1) of the said Act till the date of handing over possession or the date of Award, whichever is earlier. In these cases, from the record, it is very clear that the possession was handed over with regard to certain lands on 23rd March, 1973 and the possession of the balance lands were handed over on 17th April, 1973. We, therefore, do not find any substance in the contention of the claimant and hold that the Reference Court was right in awarding the amount at the rate of 12% per annum from 3rd February, 1970 till 22nd September, 1983.

11. As far as the third contention of the learned A.G.P. with regard to Item No. 4 in paragraph 7 of Reference Court's order is concerned i.e. while awarding interest at the rate of 9% per annum as per section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the same can be awarded only on market value and not on solatium and on the amount computed at 12%, as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act. In this context, the learned A.G.P. has placed reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prem Nath Kapur & another v. National Fertilizers Corpn. of India Ltd. & others, , wherein, the Apex Court has clearly held that no interest is payable on solatium under section 23(2) or on the additional amount under section 23(1-A), that is to say, by the aforesaid judgment, the Supreme Court has held that the only interest can be computed with regard to the market value and no interest can be made payable on the solatium under section 23(2) or on the additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum, under section 23(1-A). The learned A.G.P. has also brought to our notice another judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kapur Chand Jain & others v. State Government of Himachal Pradesh & others, . In the said judgment, the Apex Court had referred the aforesaid judgment in Prem Nath v. National Fertilizers Corpn. of India Ltd. (supra) and also has referred to an earlier judgment of a three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of Union v. Ram Mehar, , wherein, the Supreme Court has held that while computing interest under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the solatium has to be considered as a component of compensation and interest can be paid thereon. By the said judgment, the Supreme Court has also referred to the views of the other judgments delivered by the two Judge-Bench and has held that there is a conflict of decisions, especially the view taken in Prem Nath Kapur (supra) was contrary to the view taken in Union of India v. Ram Mehar (supra). Under these circumstances, by the said judgment, the Apex Court had referred the matter to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to constitute a larger Bench to resolve the conflict. We are informed that the issues are still pending as the said conflict is not resolved. The learned A.G.P. therefore contends that as the conflict is yet to be finally resolved, the claimant is not entitled to claim interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the solatium, as per section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as also interest at the rate of 9% per annum and the amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as per section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

12. With regard to this submission, the learned Counsel for the claimant contends that the learned Reference Court was right in awarding the interest on solatium and the amount as per section 23(1-A) of the said Act and also adding the same to the interest on market value. Learned Counsel for the claimant also pointed out that the Reference Court had erred, with regard to Item No. 4 of paragraph 7 of its Order in taking the date of possession as 30th September, 1983, whereas the date ought to be 23rd March, 1973 or 17th April, 1973 with regard to the lands concerned. Therefore, the contention of learned Counsel for the claimant as far as the interest at the rate of 9% per annum, as per section 28 of the Act, is concerned, it should be computed from the date of taking over possession 23rd March, 1973 till 18th October, 1989 being the date of the Order passed by the Reference Court with regard to the balance lands from 17th April, 1973 till 18th October, 1989. With regard to this, even the learned A.G.P. is unable to controvert this position that the claimant would be entitled to claim interest at the rate of 9% per annum from 23rd March, 1973 and 17th April, 1973 till 18th October, 1989 with regard to the concerned lands with were surrendered on those respective dates. In this behalf, it was brought to our notice that in a Division Bench judgment delivered by our High Court in First Appeal No. 875 of 1985, Abdul Aziz Husenmiya Patel v. The State of Maharashtra, and other connected appeals, on 16th March, 2000, wherein, on the issue of calculation of interest, as per section 28 of the Act, pertaining to solatium and additional amount awarded under section 23(1-A) of the said Act, liberty has been given to the concerned parties to approach the appropriate forum after the Supreme Court decides the matter.

13. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we hold as under :--

(i) The amount of Rs. 15/- per sq. metre awarded by the Reference Court appears to us to be fair and just and no interference is called for;

(ii) With regard to Item No. 3 in paragraph 7 of the Order of the Reference Court, the claimant would be entitled to additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum as provided under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, from the date of publication of the Notification under section 4(1) of the Act i.e. 3rd February, 1970 till the date of taking over possession, i.e. 23rd March, 1973 with regard to the lands concerned and with regard to the balance lands, the period would be from 3rd February, 1970 till 17th April, 1973 and accordingly, the aforesaid additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum under section 23(1-A) should be computed and awarded. As far as Item No. 4 in paragraph 7 of the Order of the Reference Court is concerned, the interest at the rate of 9% shall be computed, as per section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the market value of Rs. 16,09,950/- from 23rd March, 1973 and 17th April, 1973 i.e. from the date of taking over possession till the date of the Reference Court's order i.e. 18th October, 1989;

(iii) As far as whether the claimants are entitled to claim interest at the rate of 9% per annum on solatium, as per section 23(2) of the Act, the additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum, as per section 23(1-A) of the Act are concerned, the claimants are at liberty to move the Reference Court in accordance with final decision that may be rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that behalf and the Reference Court shall decide the same in accordance with law;

(iv) With the aforesaid findings, we are remanding this matter back to the Reference Court for actual computation and award;

(v) The State Government is at liberty to approach the Reference Court for refund of any excess amount that might have been paid in case the Reference Court finally comes to a conclusion the claimants are entitled to a lesser amount than what has been already awarded.

(vi) Both the appeals are accordingly partly allowed, however, with no Order as to costs.

(vii) Writ to go expeditiously.

(viii) Parties to act on an ordinary copy of this Order duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar.

(ix) Issuance of certified copy expedited.