RFA/338/2013 on 24 November 2017

1. RFA No. 335 of 2013 & CO No.66 of 2017

N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Jeet Ram & another ..Respondents.

2. RFA No. 336 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Ranjeet Singh & another ..Respondents.

3. RFA No. 337 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Sunka Ram & others ..Respondents.

4. RFA No. 338 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Smt.Tilfu & others ..Respondents.

5. RFA No. 339 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Smt. Roopa & another ..Respondents.

6. RFA No. 340 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Smt.Bohtu & another ..Respondents.

7. RFA No. 341 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Chamaru & another ..Respondents.

8. RFA No. 342 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Virender Singh & another ..Respondents.

9. RFA No. 343 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur.

…Appellant.

Versus

Smt.Prabhi Devi & another

..Respondents.

10. RFA No. 344 of 2013 N.T.P.C. Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur. …Appellant.

Versus

Premi Devi & another ..Respondents.

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Acting Chief Justice. Whether approved for reporting?1No.

For the Appellant: Mr. Jagdish Thakur, Advocate, for the appellant-N.T.P.C.

For the Respondents: Mr.Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General with Mr. R.S. Verma, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent- State.

Mr.Ashok Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms.Sukarma Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1 in RFA No.335/2013, RFA No.344/2013 and for the Cross- objector in CO No.66 of 2017.

M/s Jagat Paul, Rakesh Kumar Bansal, Angrez Kapoor vice Mr.Trilok Jamwal & Tara Singh Chauhan, for the respective respondents-claimants.

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Sanjay Karol, ACJ (oral)

CMP(M) No.1599/2017 in Cross-Objection

No.66/2017

For the reasons set out in the application, delay in filing the cross-objection, which in my considered view, has sufficiently been explained, is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Cross-objections be registered.

RFA No. 335 of 2013 & CO No.66 of 2017, a/w

RFA Nos.336 to 344 of 2013

2. In these appeals, so filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the beneficiary(ies) of the acquisition proceedings have assailed the award dated 26.02.2013, passed by learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P.(Camp at Bilaspur) in Land Reference Petition No.65-4 of 2008, titled as Jeet Ram vs. Land Acquisition Collector, Kol Dam, District Bilaspur, H.P., alongwith connected reference petitions. Also in one of the cases the beneficiary has filed the Cross-objection against the said award.

3. It is not in dispute that appeals arising out of similarly situated claimants, as also very same acquisition proceedings, arising out of very same notifications under

Sections 4 and 11 of the Act, stand decided by this Court vide judgment dated 11.01.2017, passed in RFA No. 41 of 2012, titled as N.T.P.C. Limited Kol Dam, Barmana, Bilaspur vs. Ram Rakhi & another, alongwith connected appeals. The present appeals as also the cross-objection are squarely covered by the said decision, for the issues involved are identical. This fact is not disputed. As such, as jointly prayed for, the present appeals as also the cross-objection stand disposed of, in terms of the said judgment. Directions issued in Ram Rakhi (supra) shall mutatis mutandis apply to the instant cases also. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

(Sanjay Karol), November 24, 2017

Acting Chief Justice. (Purohit)