B. N. Singh, J. -
(1.)In this batch of appeals and special leave petitions the common question which arises for consideration is whether the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, particularly Ss. 6, 23(2) and 28 thereof stand incorporated in the three State Acts with which we are concerned in these matters or whether the Land Acquisition Act has been merely referred to in the State Acts. If it is held that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act stand legislatively incorporated in the State Acts, the subsequent amendments to the Land Acquisition Act will have no effect upon the acquisitions made under the State Acts. We are concerned with three State Acts, namely, The Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Punjab Act'). The Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Nagpur Act') and the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the U.P. Act').
(2.)C.A. Nos. 9206 to 9214 of 1995; C.A. Nos. 9260-9261 of 1995; C.A. No. 3789 of 1992; S.L.P. (C) No. 12949/1992; S.L.P. (C) No. 3331/1993 and S.L.P. (C) No. 3210/1999 relate to acquisitions made under the Punjab Act. C.A. No. 839 of 1995 and C.A. Nos. 6590 to 6292 of 2001 relate to acquisitions under the U.P. Act while C. A. Nos. 1164-2000 of 1993 and S.L.P. (C) Nos. 8265-8259 of 1993 relate to acquisitions made under the Nagpur Act.
(3.)In the matters arising under the Punjab Act, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana held that the claimants, whose lands were acquired under the Punjab Act were entitled to additional compensation under S. 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 as also to the solatium under S. 23(2) and interest under S. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by Act 68 of 1984. The Court relied upon the judgment of this Court in Union of India and another vs. Zora Singh and others (1992) 1 SCC 673; Nagpur Improvement Trust and another vs. Vithal Rao and others, AIR 1973 SC 689 as also the Full Bench of that Court in Harbans Kaur and others vs. Ludhiana Improvement Trust and others, 1973 PLJ 250.