RFA-679-1994 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 103 RFA-679-1994 Date of Decision: 15.07.2026 Punjab Wakf Board …Appellant Versus The Special Military Land Acquisition Collector and others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. G.S. Bhatia, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab Mr. S.K. Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India and Mr. Rajat Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.10 *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The appellant through instant appeal is seeking modification of award dated 17.08.1993 whereby learned Additional District Judge, Amritsar has not awarded compensation as claimed by it. 2. The State Government by way of notification dated 17.03.1981 acquired land of the appellant. Land Acquisition Collector vide award dated 22.06.1983 awarded compensation of ₹3,773.44 including solatium @ 15%. The appellant demanded price of the land @ ₹250/- per marla beside solatium @15%. 3. Feeling dis-satisfied from aforesaid award, the appellant preferred petition before the Collector which was referred to Court under Sections 18 & 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘1894 Act’). 4. The appellant as well as State, in support of their contentions, led their evidence. The State attempted to justify market value determined MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.15 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. RFA-679-1994 -2- by Collector, however, appellant vehemently pleaded that value of its land has been assessed on lower side. 5. The Reference Court, appreciating evidence led by both sides, by impugned common award did not award compensation as claimed by appellant. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that during 1977-78, land of 5 villages falling within District Amritsar was acquired. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Harinder Pal Singh and others, 2005 (12) SCC 564 as well as this Court in RFA No.1257 of 1993, Union of India v. Sawaran Kaur and another has determined market value of acquired land @ ₹40,000/- per acre. The appellant is also entitled to same benefit. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No.10-Union of India expressed his inability to distinguish present case from afore-cited orders. 8. In the wake of statement of both sides, the impugned award stands modified to the extent that market value of the acquired land is assessed @₹40,000/- per acre. The appellant would also be entitled to benefit permissible under Section 23(1A) of 1894 Act as granted by Supreme Court to similarly situated landowners in afore-cited judgment. 9. In the backdrop, the appeal stands allowed in above terms. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 15.07.2026 Mohit Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.15 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.