JUDGMENT
R.L. Anand, J.
1. By this judgment, I dispose of as many as 12 Regular First Appeals No. 1471 (Kali Ram and others v. State of Haryana), 1468 (Kartara v. State of Haryana), 1469 (Mani Ram v. State of Hary-ana), 1470 (Kali Ram and others v. State of Haryana), 1472 (Joginder Singh v. State of Haryana), 1473 (Kali Ram and others v. State of Haryana), 1473 (Kali Ram and ors. v. State of Haryana), 1475 (Mani Ram v. State of Haryana), 1476 (Sawan Singh and others v. State of Haryana), 1477 (Kali Ram and others v. State of Haryana), 1599 (Joginder Singh and others v. State of Haryana), all of 1988, and 1460 (Chatra Ram v. State of Haryana) of 1989, as in my opinion all the 12 appeals can be disposed of by one judgment.
2. In pursuance of the Haryana Govt. Notification No. 16/5/82-4 MI & P, dated 28.2.1985 u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), published in official gazette dated 28.9.1985 and declared vide notification No. 1675/82-4 MI & P, dated 2.3.1985, u/s 6 of the Act, the Haryana Govt. decided to acquire 94.84 acres of land in Village Kayampur, Hadbast No. 124, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Ambala, partly at public expense and partly at the expenses of the Haryana State Electricity Board for a public purpose; namely, additional land for Yamuna Nagar Thermal Power Plant of Haryana State Electricity Board. The Collector gave the award dated 28.10.1985 vide which he awarded compensation @ Rs. 32,000/- per acre for Chant Land, gair mumkin, tubewell, khal, bara, Rs. 22,000/- per acre for Barani land, Rs. 11,000/- per acre for Banjar Kadim and Rs. 5,500/- per acre for gair mumkin khadan land.
3. Dissatisfied with the award dated 28.10.1985, passed by the Collector, the land owners filed a reference u/s 18 of the Act before the court of the Addl. Distt. Judge, Ambala, who framed the following issues:-
” 1. What was the market value of the land in question at the time of acquisition ?
2. Whether the claimants are entitled to any amount as severance charges, if so, at what rate ?
3. Relief.”
4. The parties led evidence before the court of Addl. Distt. Judge, Ambala, who gave the award dated 15.6.1988 and the claimants were awarded the uniform rate of Rs. 50,000/- per acre. Resultantly, the reference u/s 18 of the Act was accepted and the compensation was enhanced accordingly. It was also ordered by the court of Addl. Distt. Judge that the claimants shall be entitled to the benefit of 30% solatium, additional compensation amount of 12% and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year from the date of possession and 15% per annum for the subsequent period till payment.
5. Still dissatisfied with the award dated 15.6.1988, the present appeals by the land owners.
6.I have heard the counsel for the parties and with their
assistance have gone through the record of this case.
7. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court has awarded compensation (3) Rs. 60,000/- per acre with regard to the land of Village Rattanpura which village is adjoining to the land of Village Kayampur. Both the villages fall in the same tehsil, the land of villages Rattanpura and Kayampur was acquired for the same purpose, i.e., extension of thermal power plant at Yamuna Nagar, and this is the best transaction and instance which can be relied upon by the High Court. He submitted that the land of village Rattanpura was acquired vide notification dated 16.3.1985 as per notification u/s 4 of the Act whereas the land of the present village, was acquired vide notification dated 28.2.1985, which notification was issued u/s 4 of the Act. Counsel for the appellants submits at the Bar that the villages Kayampur and Rattanpura virtually adjoin each other and therefore, the compensation should be enhanced to Rs. 60,000/- per acre, as awarded by the High Court vide judgment dated 14.5.1990 passed in RFA 1186 of 1988.
8. There is merit in the contention of the counsel for the appellants.
9. Counsel for the State, during the course of arguments, invited my attention to the site plan which shows that the land of village Rattanpura adjoins to the acquired area which falls within the revenue limits of village Kayampur.
10. It is the common case of Ihe parties that the land of villages Rattanpura and Kayampur was acquired for one purpose, i.e. for extension of the thermal power plant at Yamuna Nagar. The potential value of the acquired area cannot, in any manner, be less meritorious as compared to the land of village Rattanpura. There is a difference of only 16 days in between the two notifications. In these circumstances, 1 am inclined to hold that the appellants should also be paid the compensation @ Rs. 60,000/- per acre.
11. Resultantly, the appeals are partly allowed by modifying the judgment of the trial court and it is hereby declared that the appellants shall get compensation @ Rs. 60,000/- per acre. Apart from that, they shall also be entitled to the grant of statutory benefits of the amended provisions of the Act, i.e. Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28. No costs.
12. Appeals partly allowed