The Punjab and Haryana High Court has enhanced compensation payable to a group of landowners whose land was acquired for the construction of a Mini Secretariat at Barara in Ambala district. The Court held that the compensation fixed by the Reference Court required modification after a detailed assessment of sale transactions relating to the acquired area and surrounding land.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from the acquisition of more than 20 acres of land in Village Barara, Ambala, for the public purpose of constructing a Mini Secretariat for Sub Division Barara. The acquisition process began with a notification issued on May 3, 2012, under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Initially, the Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation at the rate of ₹15 lakh per acre. Dissatisfied with the amount, the landowners sought a reference for enhancement. The Reference Court subsequently increased the compensation and fixed the market value at ₹390 per square yard along with statutory benefits.
Still aggrieved, the landowners approached the High Court through 19 connected appeals seeking further enhancement.
Arguments Before the Court
Senior counsel appearing for the landowners argued that the Reference Court had wrongly discarded several sale deeds produced by the claimants. According to the appellants, many of those transactions related directly to the acquired land and reflected a much higher market value.
The State of Haryana opposed the appeals and supported the findings of the Reference Court, contending that the compensation already awarded was based on proper appreciation of the evidence on record.
Court’s Observations
Justice Harkesh Manuja first examined an important legal question regarding the scope of Section 26 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
The Court observed that Section 26 lays down the method to be followed by the Collector while determining market value and does not restrict the powers of the judicial authority or court examining a compensation dispute.
“The word ‘Collector’ as employed under Section 26 of the 2013 Act cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, be construed to include the ‘Authority’ or the ‘Court’,”
the bench observed.
The Court further noted that landowners should receive “just and fair compensation” and that sale transactions placed on record could not be ignored when assessing the true market value of the acquired land.
After examining multiple sale deeds and applying appreciation for the time gap between the transactions and the acquisition notification, the Court calculated an average market value of ₹1,520 per square yard. However, considering that the sale deeds related to comparatively small parcels of land, the Court applied a 60% deduction toward the size difference.
Decision
Allowing the appeals in part, the High Court modified the award dated August 2, 2024, passed by the Reference Court.
The Court held that the landowners would be entitled to compensation calculated at the market value of ₹608 per square yard, instead of ₹390 per square yard awarded earlier. The bench also directed that all consequential statutory benefits and interest available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, including interest on solatium, be granted to the landowners.
With these directions, all 19 connected appeals were disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: Jaharvir Goga Samiti v. State of Haryana and Another
Case Number: RFA No. 1182 of 2024 (O&M) and 18 connected cases
Judge: Justice Harkesh Manuja
Decision Date: May 12, 2026
