- (1.) BUNCH of appeals pertaining to the acquisition of land, where notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') was issued on 19.7.2002 pertaining to the land of village Patti Gaddar, District Kaithal were decided by this court vide judgment dated 27.3.2009 passed in R.F.A. No. 5466 of 2008 ­Kirpal Singh v. State of Haryana and the cases were remanded back to the learned Reference Court for fresh decision. After remand, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land vide different awards. Vide judgment dated 23.1.2012, this court decided the appeals against the awards passed by the learned Reference Court in the aforesaid case as well as appeals pertaining to notification under Section 4 of the Act issued on 11.11.2002.
(2.) AT the time of hearing of bunch of appeals, it came on record that though the State had impugned the award of the learned Reference Court, but the appeals had not been filed in all the cases. As the State cannot be selective in filing appeals, the position was sought to be clarified. It also came on record that though all the references before the court below were arising out of the same acquisition, but still those were decided by the court below in piece-meal on different dates and were not bunched together. In judgment dated 23.1.2012, this court required the State to clarify the position and the Registry was also directed to put up a note as to whether there are any instructions already issued to the learned courts below for deciding all the references arising out of the same acquisition together. It was observed as under: "26. Considering the facts, which have come on record in the present set of appeals where the State did not file appeal in all the land references, decided by the learned court below, pertaining to the acquisition in question, learned counsel for the State to clarify the position about the number of land references decided by the court below pertaining to the notifications under Section 4 of the Act issued on 19.7.2002 and 11.11.2002 and the appeals filed in this court. In case the awards passed the Reference Court have not been challenged in all the cases, the reasons therefor may also be explained. 27. A photo copy of the order be given to learned counsel for the State by the Bench Secretary under his signatures. 28. A perusal of the office note of the Grouping Section shows that the learned court below decided the cases pertaining to the acquisition in question in piece meal. These were decided in small-small groups on different dates, i.e., 31.1.2007, 28.7.2007, 1.4.2010, 1.5.2010, 3.5.2010, 1.6.2010, 16.7.2010, 2.8.2010, 3.8.2010, 1.9.2010, 1.10.2010, 2.11.2010, 3.1.2011, 1.3.2011 and 1.4.2011."
(3.) IN response to the aforesaid notice to the State, affidavit dated 4.4.2012 was filed by Land Acquisition Officer, Urban Estate, Panchkula along with some information regarding the cases filed and in the process of filing and which had been filed earlier but pending with the department for removing the objections raised by the Registry.;