1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO.  2634-2671 OF 2018

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC.     Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS

BANT LAL ETC.                             Respondent(s)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NOs 2672-2688 OF 2018

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. The parties are before this Court disputing the

land  value fixed  in respect  of the  acquired land.

The State is aggrieved by the value fixed; whereas

the claimants want higher compensation.

2. When  the  matter  came  up  to  this  Court,  on

02.08.2018,  after  extensive  hearing,  the  following

order was passed :-

“We  have  heard  learned  counsel  on

both sides and also gone through the

records.

We  have  given  two  options  to  the

claimants.   

First  option  is,  as  far  as  land

acquired  for  water  works  is

concerned, we will fix the value of

the  land  at  Rs.30,00,000/-  (Rupees

2

Thirty Lakhs) per acre, having regard

to  the  fact  that  in  certain  sale

deeds  of  other  persons  for  the

similar land the same value is fixed

and as far as the land acquired in

Sewage  Treatment  Plant  (STP)  is

concerned, the value will be slightly

enhanced  and  may  be  fixed  at

Rs.40,00,000/-  (Rupees  Forty  Lakhs)

per acre.

Second option is that the Government

will  return  the  unutilised  land  to

the claimants, and remand the matters

to  the  High  Court  for  appropriate

fixation of land value in respect of

the  actual  land  utilised  by  the

Government, with liberty to both the

sides to lead additional evidence.

Post  the  matter  on  Tuesday,  the  7th

August,  2018  in  “Miscellaneous

Hearing” at the top of the Board as

part-heard.”

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case, it is submitted that the second option will

be the best option in the fitness of things.  In the

above circumstances, the appeals are disposed of as

follows :-

i) The Government will return the un-utilised land

to the claimants in accordance with law.

ii) As far as the remaining land is concerned, we set

aside the fixation made by the High Court and remit

3

the matters to the High Court with liberty to both

sides to lead additional evidence.

4. We  make it  clear that  the first  option is  no

reflexion on any idea of just compensation made by

this Court.

5. In view of the fact that we have set aside the

impugned Judgment of the High Court, it will be open

to  the  State  to  approach  the  Reference  Court  for

refund of the amounts already deposited in terms of

the orders passed by this Court.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ]  

New Delhi; August 10, 2018.