- (1.) Delay condoned and leave granted in Special Leave Petitions. 1.1 The appellant-Faridabad Gas Power Project, NTPCL, has filed Civil Appeal Nos. 493, 523, 520, 518, 524, 519, 522, 512, 508, 502, 504, 509, 517, 553, 554, 552, 514, 521, 515, 513, 584, 582, 583, 596, 580, 579, 574, 576, 532, 527, 529, 531, 528, 571, 497, 567, 501, 494, 564, 560, 545, 656, 543, 540, 539, 570 of 2007 and Civil Appeal arising out of S.L. P. [C] No. 7033/06 with regard to village Mujheri; Civil Appeal Nos. 525, 506, 507, 549, 511, 533, 530, 561, 559, 557, 556, 562, 536, 541, 546, 586, 587, 590, 535, of 2007 and Civil Appeal arising out of S.L. P. [C] Nos. 7457, 9485 of 2007, 7032, 7008 of 2006, 7460, 7458, 3846, 3880, 3893, 9385 of 2007 with regard to village Sihi; Civil Appeal Nos. 551, 510, 578, 565, 555, 499, 589, 592, 547 of 2007, Civil Appeal arising out of S.L. P. [C] No. 11558 of 2007 with regard to village Jhajru; Civil Appeal Nos. 544, 548, 588, 542, 655, 698 of 2007, and Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. [C] No. 7031 of 2006 with regard to village Neemka and Civil Appeal Nos. 516, 575, 500, 572, 563, 558, 537, 591 of 2007 with regard to village Pyala. 1.2 Civil Appeal Nos. 569, 566 and 568 of 2007 have been filed by claimants, who are residents of village Mujheri; whereas Civil Appeal Nos. 526, 581, 585, 871, 845 of 2007 have been filed by claimants of village Jhajru for enhancement of the amounts of compensation.
(2.) All the aforesaid appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated 29.05.2004 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, in Regular First Appeal No. 1543 of 2000 and a batch of 146 connected appeals. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has dismissed the appeals filed by M/s. Faridabad Gas Power Project, National Thermal Power Corporation Limited, as well as by the land owners and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 21.02.2000 passed by the Additional District Judge, Faridabad, in land references preferred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in these cases they were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. 3. The brief facts, which led to the filing of these appeals, are as follows:
(3.) 1 The State of Haryana issued Notification dated 16.08.1995 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short 'the Act ] for acquisition of a track of 319.31 acres of lands in five villages, namely, Mujheri (154.23 acres), Neemka (67 acres), Sihi (73 acres), Jhajru (24.12 acres) and Pyala (0.96 acres) situated in Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Faridabad, for public purpose, namely, for construction of 400 MW Faridabad Gas Based Power Project with an ultimate capacity of 1200 MW [a unit of National Thermal Power Corporation Limited, Government of India Enterprise]. 3.2 The Land Acquisition Collector, Faridabad [for short 'LAC ] awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,50,000/- per acre for Chahi land, i.e. about Rs. 52/- per sq. yard and Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre, i.e. Rs. 42/- per sq. yard for Banjar Kadim and Gair Mumkin lands falling in the revenue estate of villages Mujheri, Neemka and Sihi. For the land acquired in village Jhajru, the LAC awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,57,000/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre for 'Gair Mumkin land. With regard to the acquisition of land in village Pyala, the LAC awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre for Chahi land. Other statutory benefits for which the claimants are entitled to were also awarded to the land owners. 3.3 Being aggrieved against and dissatisfied with the award passed by the LAC, the claimants preferred reference applications under Section 18 of the Act. According to the claimants, they are entitled to the enhancement of compensation as their land acquired by the State has potential value for residential or commercial purposes. The State of Haryana contested the references, inter alia, contending that the land owners had accepted the compensation without protest; that the acquired land is situated in different villages far away from the urban areas of Faridabad - Ballabgarh towns and did not possess any potentiality other than being agricultural land. 3.4 Before the reference court (Additional District Judge, Faridabad), the parties led evidence and raised mainly the following two issues: i What was the market price of the acquired land on the date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ii) Whether the petitioners are estopped from filing the petition by their acts and conduct The Additional District Judge vide common judgments [judgment dated 21.02.2000 in respect of lands in the villages Mujheri and Sihi and judgment dated 07.03.2000 in regard to Neemka lands] awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 306/- per sq. yard equivalent to Rs. 14,81,040/- per acre for the land acquired in villages Mujheri, Neemka and Sihi respectively. In regard to the lands acquired in village Jhajru situated away from the lands at Mujheri, Neemka and Sihi, compensation at the rate of Rs. 190/- per sq. yard equivalent to Rs. 9,19,600/- per acre was awarded as per award dated 21.02.2000. For the land situated in village Pyala, the reference court is said to have awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre. In answer to the second issue, the reference court observed that the reference applications preferred by the claimants under Section 18 of the Act, could be construed as protest against the award and there was no need for them to lodge separate protest in writing before accepting the compensation. The reference court allowed the reference applications made by the claimants and accordingly, enhanced the amounts of compensation. 3.5 A batch of appeals under Section 54 of the Act came to be filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, both by NTPC praying for reduction of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference court, and a section of claimants seeking enhancement of the amounts of compensation for the acquired land. 3.6 After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and having gone through the award of the reference court as well as other material on record, the High Court by its judgment dated 29.05.2004 dismissed all the appeals and thereby confirmed the award made by the reference court. Hence, these appeals have been preferred by the NTPC and by the claimants challenging the correctness and validity of the common judgment and order of the High Court.;