RFA-614 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Ram Kishan State of Haryana CORAM: Present: HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) laid to the District Judge, Rohtak, Court’). 2. acres), situated within the revenue estate of Village Hadbast No.75, the then Tehsil Jhajja Government of (published on 22.06.1990) 04.12.1990) Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for publ “construction of 58000 K.M. 614-1996 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ***** RFA Date of Decision: 0 Ram Kishan Versus State of Haryana CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr.Abhijeet Chaudhary, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. -.- HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present appeal challenge has been laid to the Award dated 02.11.1995, passed by the learned District Judge, Rohtak, (hereinafter referred to as Briefly stating, 17.04 acres of , situated within the revenue estate of Village Hadbast No.75, the then Tehsil Jhajja Government of Haryana vide notifications dated (published on 22.06.1990) and 04.12.1990), issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for publ construction of Gurgaon Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to K.M.” The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA-614-1996 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.03.2026 …….Appellant Versus ..….Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Abhijeet Chaudhary, Advocate Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. way of filing the present appeal challenge has been passed by the learned Additional (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Reference 17.04 acres of land (later found to be 17.55 , situated within the revenue estate of Village Dawarkhana, Hadbast No.75, the then Tehsil Jhajjar, was acquired by the vide notifications dated 04.06.1990 and 26.11.1990 (published on , issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for public purpose i.e. for Gurgaon Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide way of filing the present appeal challenge has been Additional ‘Reference (later found to be 17.55 Dawarkhana, was acquired by the 1990 (published on , issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition ic purpose i.e. for Gurgaon Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.12 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-614 award dated acquired land @ Rs Rs.80,000/ Banjar and Gair Mumkin land under the Act. 3. landowner filed which came by the learned Reference Court made to the market value assessed by the LAC 4. Court, the present appeal landowner. 5. through the paper 6. commenced vide notification dated 22.06.1990 4 of the Act was carried out for public purpose, namely, for “ Gurgaon Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to 58000 land under present acquisition relates to the revenue estate of Village Dawarkhana, the then Tehsil Jhajj its award granted market value Nehri/Chahi land, Rs.80,000/ 614-1996 (O&M) [2] dated 04.06.1991 assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre 80,000/- per acre for Barani land and Banjar and Gair Mumkin land, along with all under the Act. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellant/ landowner filed reference petition invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of vide award dated by the learned Reference Court, however, no enhancement was made to the market value assessed by the LAC Aggrieved of the Award passed by the lear Court, the present appeal was preferred at the instance of appellant/ landowner. I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. In the present case, the acquisition proceedings commenced vide notification dated 22.06.1990 4 of the Act, followed by an award dated 0 was carried out for public purpose, namely, for “ n Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to 58000 land under present acquisition relates to the revenue estate of Village Dawarkhana, the then Tehsil Jhajjar, District Rohtak its award granted market value @ Rs Nehri/Chahi land, Rs.80,000/- per acre for Barani land and ] assessed market value in respect of the per acre for Nehri/Chahi land Barani land and Rs.60,000/- per acre for , along with all other statutory benefits Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellant/ petition invoking Section 18 of the Act, vide award dated 02.11.1995 passed , however, no enhancement was made to the market value assessed by the LAC. Aggrieved of the Award passed by the learned Reference preferred at the instance of appellant/ I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone In the present case, the acquisition proceedings commenced vide notification dated 22.06.1990 issued under Section , followed by an award dated 04.06.1991. The acquisition was carried out for public purpose, namely, for “construction of n Water Supply Channel from RD 49950 to 58000 K.M.” The land under present acquisition relates to the revenue estate of Village , District Rohtak. The LAC vide @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for per acre for Barani land and assessed market value in respect of the for Nehri/Chahi land, per acre for other statutory benefits Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellant/ petition invoking Section 18 of the Act, passed , however, no enhancement was ned Reference preferred at the instance of appellant/ I have head learned counsel for the parties and gone In the present case, the acquisition proceedings issued under Section .06.1991. The acquisition construction of The land under present acquisition relates to the revenue estate of Village . The LAC vide per acre for per acre for Barani land and SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.12 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-614 Rs.60,000/ other statutory benefits under the Act 7. same public purpose was acquired from the nearby revenue estate of Village Lagerpur, Tehsil Jahjjar, District Rohtak. acquisition, t value @ Rs.1,00,000/ acre for Barani land and Rs.60,000/ However, the same was later enhanced by this court vide decision dated 04.11.2011 passed in Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana in favour of landowners to the tune of Rs. three categories of the acquired land value assessed by the learned Reference Court. 8. present case, carried out for the same purpose in the two revenue estates of Villages Dawarkhana and Lagerpur be of same nature and potential while making assessment value. In such circumstances, the appellant herein is also held entitled for the grant of similar Rs.10,000/ above the market value assessed by the along with all statutory benefits as provided under the Act 614-1996 (O&M) [3] Rs.60,000/- per acre for Banjar and Gair Mumkin land, along with all other statutory benefits under the Act. Admittedly, vide same notification, certain land for the same public purpose was acquired from the nearby revenue estate of Village Lagerpur, Tehsil Jahjjar, District Rohtak. acquisition, the LAC vide its award dated 30.05.1991 @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for Nehri/Chahi land, Rs.80,000/ acre for Barani land and Rs.60,000/- However, the same was later enhanced by this court vide decision dated 04.11.2011 passed in RFA-884 of 1995 Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana in favour of landowners to the tune of Rs. three categories of the acquired land value assessed by the learned Reference Court. Keeping in mind the aforesaid, since present case, relates to the same notification dated 22.06.1990 carried out for the same purpose and even the LAC treated the land in the two revenue estates of Villages Dawarkhana and Lagerpur be of same nature and potential while making assessment n such circumstances, the appellant herein is also held entitled for the grant of similar enhancement Rs.10,000/- per acre for all the three categories of land over above the market value assessed by the along with all statutory benefits as provided under the Act ] per acre for Banjar and Gair Mumkin land, along with all . Admittedly, vide same notification, certain land for the same public purpose was acquired from the nearby revenue estate of Village Lagerpur, Tehsil Jahjjar, District Rohtak. For the said dated 30.05.1991 granted market per acre for Nehri/Chahi land, Rs.80,000/- per per acre for Banjar Kadim land. However, the same was later enhanced by this court vide decision 884 of 1995 titled as Hoshiar Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana by granting enhancement in favour of landowners to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per acre for all the three categories of the acquired land over and above the market value assessed by the learned Reference Court. the aforesaid, since the acquisition in the relates to the same notification dated 22.06.1990 and even the LAC treated the land in the two revenue estates of Villages Dawarkhana and Lagerpur be of same nature and potential while making assessment of market n such circumstances, the appellant herein is also held enhancement to the tune of per acre for all the three categories of land over and above the market value assessed by the learned Reference Court along with all statutory benefits as provided under the Act, when it per acre for Banjar and Gair Mumkin land, along with all Admittedly, vide same notification, certain land for the same public purpose was acquired from the nearby revenue estate of For the said granted market per per acre for Banjar Kadim land. However, the same was later enhanced by this court vide decision Hoshiar enhancement per acre for all the over and above the market in the relates to the same notification dated 22.06.1990 and even the LAC treated the land in the two revenue estates of Villages Dawarkhana and Lagerpur to market n such circumstances, the appellant herein is also held to the tune of and learned Reference Court , when it SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.12 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-614 has not been disputed that both the revenue estates are abutting and adjoining being in close vicinity. 9. appellant/landowner rendered by this Court in and another Vs. State of Haryana, 10. unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s 11. disposed of. 09.03.2026 sanjay 614-1996 (O&M) [4] has not been disputed that both the revenue estates are abutting and adjoining being in close vicinity. Consequently, the appeal appellant/landowner is disposed of in terms of the decision rendered by this Court in RFA-884- and another Vs. State of Haryana, decided on Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving appropriate application(s) before the learned Executing Court. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2026 Whether speaking/reasoned? Whether Reportable? ] has not been disputed that both the revenue estates are abutting and appeal preferred at the instance of is disposed of in terms of the decision -1995, titled as Hoshiar Singh decided on 04.11.2011. r, the landowner(s) has/have unfortunately expired in the appeal(s)/ cross-objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving ) before the learned Executing Court. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No Yes/No has not been disputed that both the revenue estates are abutting and preferred at the instance of is disposed of in terms of the decision Hoshiar Singh r, the landowner(s) has/have objection(s) after filing thereof and the legal heirs have not been impleaded, they shall be at liberty to seek execution of the present decision by moving Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) SANJAY GUPTA 2026.03.12 19:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document