113 (04 case IN TH State of Pun Ram Chand CORAM: Present: HARKESH bearing RF out of comm [2] appeals pre (for short 06.12.1991 (hereinafte the award “LAC’). [3] respondent Village Jhan cases) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA and Date of Punjab and another Versus hand and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Additional for the appellants / State of Pu Mr. Varun Advocate, Advocate Ms. Kriteka Sheokand, Advoca for the respondents-landowner **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose off RFA Nos. 660, 661, 662 & 663 o f common acquisition / award. The appellants-State of Punja preferred under Section 54 of the hort “1894 Act”), seek setting a .1991 passed by the learned Additio inafter to be referred as “Referenc ward passed by the Land Acquis In the present case(s), so ndent(s)-landowner(s) situated with Jhansla, H.B. No. 162, Tehsil Rajpu UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 660 of 1997 (O&M) and “03” connected cases Date of Decision: 20.01.2026 ...Appellants ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA ional Advocate General, Punjab Punjab. ocate for dvocate owners (in RFA-660-1997) e off the present four appeals 663 of 1997, as the same arise Punjab, by instituting the present f the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ting aside of an award dated dditional District Judge, Patiala ference Court”) while restoring cquisition Collector (for short , some land owned by the within the revenue estate of Rajpura, District Patiala, came to DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.29 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
          -2-     be acquired vide Notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 Act issued on 05/06.08.1985 & 12.08.1985 respectively for the public purpose, namely, “for the construction of SYL Canal; followed by Award No. 121/P-SYL dated 25.05.1986 passed by the LAC, whereby the market value of the acquired land was assessed @ Rs.62,000/- per acre for Chahi land; and Rs.35,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land. [4] Aggrieved of the assessment made by the LAC, the interested persons / respondent(s)-landowner(s) preferred reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which came to be partly accepted, while enhancing the market value for Chahi land to Rs. 81,600/- per acre. [5] Being dissatisfied with the determination made by the learned Reference Court, the appellant-State of Punjab has filed the present appeal(s). [6] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book/relevant record. [7] A perusal of the record shows that the learned Reference Court relied upon a previous award dated 25.03.1987 (Ex. A-7) passed by the then learned District Judge, Patiala, wherein the market value of the land was assessed @ Rs.60,000/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs.15,000/- for Gair Mumkin land pertaining to the acquisition proceedings carried out for the same revenue estate of Village Jhansla. It is not in dispute that notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the 1894 in that case were issued on 16.09.1982 and 14.12.1982 for the same public purpose, i.e. construction of SYL Canal. Taking into account the time gap of around three years DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.29 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
          -3-     between the notification dated 16.09.1982 issued earlier and the present notification dated 06.08.1985 under Section 4 of the 1894 Act; the learned Reference Court rightly assessed the rate of land @ Rs.81,600/- per acre for Chahi land by increasing 12% per annum in the land value. [8] Considering the fact that the respondents-landowners have rightly been granted compensation to the tune of Rs.81,600/- per acre of their land, therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, no interference is called for in the impugned award passed by the learned Reference Court while awarding 12% appreciation per annum for the time gap between the two acquisitions in favour of landowner-respondent. Consequently, the present appeals being devoid of merits are hereby dismissed. [9] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off. [10] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.
January 20, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE

    
    DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.29 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document