N.C.JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS judgment of mine would dispose of Regular First Appeal No. 562, 563, 565, 566, 569, 571 to 575, 577 to 580, 584, 482, 484, 485 to 489, 491, 493, 495, 501, 502, 505, 507 to 514, 517, 518, 522 to 524, 528 to 530, 531 to 541, 543 to 545, 547, 549 to 557, 559 and 560 of 1991 filed by the Union of India as they arise out of a common award given by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar. In these cases, the land-owner-respondents could not be served on account of some lapse on the part of the Union of India. It was stated by Mr. Pippat that all the land-owners after the acquisition of their lands and houses had shifted from village Kathania and that their whereabouts were not known and it was for this reason that Union of India was not in a position to serve them. In any case, this Court has gone through the detailed award of the Additional District Judge and since no interference regarding the valuation of super-structures is called for, there is no need to put the State to more botheration for effecting service upon the respondent-landowners.
(2.) THE land measuring 11513 Kanals situated in village Kathania alongwith super-structures standing thereupon was acquired by the State of Punjab for Union of India for the defence purposes by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 11. 7. 1977 published in the official gazette on 22. 7. 1977. The Land Acquisition Collector determined the market value of the acquired land as well as super-structure. The super-structures were valued in accordance with the report of the P. W. D. Aggrieved against the valuation of super-structures, the landowners filed references under Section 18 of the Act before the Land Acquisition Court which were consolidated and disposed of by the award under challenge before this Court. The Additional District Judge in all the cases has enhanced the valuation in all the cases of super-structures to the extent of 50% of the difference between the P. W. D. rates and the rates of the private valuers given in the valuation reports on the basis of award No. 5 wherein the same Special Land Acquisition Collector not only took into consideration the valuation reports of private valuers PW-3, PW-5, PW-6 alongwith P. W. D. rates, but also granted the necessary enhancement to the extent of 50% of the difference between the P. W. D. rates and the rates of private valuers. It has not been disputed before me that award No. 5 was confirmed right upto the Supreme Court. It has further remained undisputed that whereas in the case of super-structures the necessary enhancement of 50% was given, but the case of tubewells enhancement was given to the extent of 80% of the difference between the P. W. D. rates and the rates given by the private valuers. In view of the confirmation of award No. 5 by the Supreme Court, as has been noticed in the impugned award which is under challenge before this Court in the present appeals, the Additional District Judge after taking up the case of each landowner has granted necessary enhancement and arrived at a particular figure. Since the valuation put on the super-structures is based upon the principle laid down in award No. 5, which as has been observed above stands confirmed by the Apex Court, no case for interference in these appeals is made out and it would be futile to keep the cases pending before this Court for effecting service upon the landowner-respondents.
(3.) FOR the reasons given above the appeals are found to be devoid of any merit and the same are consequently ordered to be dismissed. Since the respondent-landowners have not put in appearance, there would be no order as to costs.;