The State Of H.P. Through vs Shri Dharam Singh Mahantan
2021 Latest Caselaw 4792 HP

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
              ON THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021
                             BEFORE




                                                        .
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR





              REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.63 OF 2016
    Between





    1. THE STATE OF H.P. THROUGH
       SECRETARY (PWD) TO THE
       GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
       SHIMLA-2.





    2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
       HPPWD DIVISION JUBBAL,
       DISTRICT SHIMLA,
       HIMACHAL PRADESH.

    3. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,

       SHIMLA, HPPWD SOUTH ZONE,
       WINTER FIELD, SHIMLA,
       HIMACHAL PRADESH
                                                 .....PETITIONERS


    (BY SHRI DINESH THAKUR,
    ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENEAL)

    AND




    SHRI DHARAM SINGH MAHANTAN





    S/O LATE SHRI SURAT RAM MEHANTAN,
    R/O VILLAGE & P.O. TURAN,
    TEHSIL JUBBAL,





    DISTRICT SHIMLA,
    HIMACHAL PRADESH,
    PRESENTLY
    R/O SONA BHAWAN, DHINGU HILL,
    SANJAULI,
    SHIMLA-171006
                                                ....RESPONDENTS
    (BY SHRI M.S. THAKUR, ADVOCATE)

          This Appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court
    delivered the following:




                                       ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:09:00 :::CIS
                                                    RFA No.63 of 2016

                                 ...2...

                            JUDGMENT

This appeal has arisen from the Award dated

.

27.6.2015 (Land Reference No.34-S/4 of 2013/12) passed by

learned District Judge (Forest), Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in

Reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), preferred by land owners

against Award No. 46/08, dated 29.9.2008, passed by Land

Acquisition Collector, with respect to land situated in village

Prem Nagar, Tehsil Jubbal, District Shimla. In present case, for

acquiring land for Thana via Turan Road, Notification under

Section 4 of the Act was issued on 1.8.2005.

2. For construction of Thana via Turan Road, land

belonging to other villagers was also acquired in the same

process initiated by issuing aforesaid Notification dated

1.8.2005, under Section 4 of the Act.

3. Other similar Land Reference Petitions, bearing

No.7-S/4 of 2014/11, titled as Sawaran Dass v. State; 1-S/4 of

2014/11, titled as Moti Ram v. State; 8-S/4 of 2014/11, titled

as Suresh Kumar v. State; 2-S/4 of 2014/11, titled as Surender

Singh v. State; and 40-S/4 of 2014/11, titled as Jai Lal Mantan

v. State, arising out of same award No.46/08, dated

29.9.2008, passed by Land Acquisition Collector, were decided

by Reference Court on 27.6.2015 by passing a common

award. In all the cases, land was acquired for one and same

RFA No.63 of 2016

...3...

purpose for which land was acquired in present case. The

Award passed in the aforesaid Reference Petitions was

.

assailed by present appellants-State by filing RFA Nos.59 of

2016, 60 of 2016, 61 of 2016, 62 of 2016 and 67 of 2016 and

land owners had also preferred Cross Objections for

enhancement of compensation. All those appeals alongwith

Cross Objections have been decided by a Coordinate Bench of

this Court vide common judgment dated 1.1.2020, passed in

aforesaid RFA No. 59 of 2016 and other connected appeals.

4. Land Reference Petition No.34-S/4 of 2013/12, i.e.

Reference Petition in present case, was also decided by the

Reference Court alongwith Reference Petition No.7-S/4 of

2014/11, vide common judgment dated 27.6.2015.

5. In Appeal RFA No.59/2016 and other connected

appeals, it was conceded by the State that claimants in those

cases were also entitled to enhanced market value of acquired

land at the rate of `2700/- per centiare alongwith all

consequential statutory benefits as per judgment passed in

RFA No.368 of 2014, titled as Himachal Pradesh Power

Corporation Limited and another v. Narayan Singh & others.

6. Considering aforesaid facts, learned counsel for

parties are in agreement that case in present appeal is also

squarely covered by the judgment passed in RFA No.59 of

2016 and connected matters and claimants herein are entitled

RFA No.63 of 2016

...4...

for compensation as was determined payable to

respondents/claimants therein.

.

7. In view of above, this appeal is also decided in

terms of judgment passed in RFA No. 59 of 2016 and findings

therein shall be mutatis mutandi applicable in present case

also and, accordingly, land owners in present appeal are held

entitled for compensation at the rate of `2700/- per centiare

along with consequential statutory benefits in accordance with

law.

Appeal stands allowed in aforesaid terms along

with all pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

                                           ( Vivek Singh Thakur )
    September 29, 2021(sd)                          Judge.