Gurdip Singh Vs Union of India and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

Gurdip Singh Vs Union of India and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with consent (no objection from respondents): learned Arbitrator directed to decide the pending arbitration proceedings for enhancement of compensation within 02 months, taking into consideration the Award dated 23.11.2020 (Annexure P-6) in Case No.MA171 of 2011 (Waryam Singh vs. Union of India & others, same village); failing which petitioner entitled to litigation cost(s) of Rs.50,000/- payable by respondent No.4. Pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to the same compensation (Rs. 1.45 lac per Marla, with statutory benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2), 28 and 34, Land Acquisition Act, 1894) as paid to similarly situated landowners of the same village under the award dated 23.11.2020 (P-6) for adjoining land of the same kind acquired under the same National Highways Act acquisition. +1 more

Court's answer

The Arbitrator is to decide the pending enhancement proceedings by taking into consideration the Award dated 23.11.2020 (Annexure P-6) passed in Case No.MA171 of 2011 titled 'Waryam Singh vs. Union of India & others' pertaining to the same village.

Ratio / Principle

The present petition is disposed of with the direction to decide the arbitration proceedings related to enhancement of compensation pending before the learned Arbitrator within 02 months from today.

Key takeaways

In case the learned Arbitrator fails to conclude the arbitration proceedings within the aforementioned period of 02 months, the petitioner shall be entitled to litigation cost(s) of Rs.50,000/- towards delay in adjudication, which shall be paid by respondent No.4.ratio¶28
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Harkesh Manuja, J., Oral), CWP No.9472 of 2025 (O&M), decided 11.09.2025 - Gurdip Singh v. Union of India and others. Petitioner, whose land was acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 for widening of Jalandhar-Pathankot NH-1A, sought mandamus for compensation parity with similarly situated landowners of the same village who received Rs. 1.45 lac per Marla under award dated 23.11.2020 (P-6) in Case No.MA171 of 2011, 'Waryam Singh vs. Union of India & others', with statutory benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2), 28 and 34, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, relying on M/s Golden Iron and Steel Forgings, 2011(4) R.C.R (Civil) 375 (DB) and Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, Civil Appeal No. 7064/19 (SC); alternatively, a time-bound decision on his enhancement case. His enhancement matter had been finally heard by the Arbitrator on 08.01.2024 but the award was never pronounced; that Arbitrator stood transferred, and his application dated 19.11.2024 (P-5) for rehearing remained pending. Counsel for the respondents raised no objection. Held: petition disposed of with direction to the learned Arbitrator to decide the pending enhancement arbitration within 02 months, taking into consideration the Waryam Singh award dated 23.11.2020; on failure, petitioner entitled to litigation cost(s) of Rs.50,000/- payable by respondent No.4. Pending applications disposed of.

1

CWP No.9472 of 2025 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

205

CWP No.9472 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:11.09.2025

GURDIP SINGH

......Petitioner

Vs

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Satbir Rathore, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr r . Bhupender Singh, Advocate fo Mr. Rishi Kaushal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G., Pu n jab.

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

[1]. Pr e sent petition has been filed o n behalf of the petitioner see k ing

following relief : -

(i) Issue a writ in the na tu re of mandamus directing the re sp ondents to pay the same co m pensation to the petitioner as has be e n paid to the similarly situated l and owners of the same Villag e as pe r award dated 23.11.2020 (P - 6) relating to the same kin d of ad jo ining land i.e. Rs. 1.45 lac pe r Marla for the land acquired u n der sa m e acquisition under the Nation a l Highways Act, 1956 for wide n ing of J alandhar-Pathankot NH-1A al o ngwith all statutory benefits as per pr o visions of Sections 23 (1-A), 23 (2), 28 and 34 of the La nd A cq uisition Act, 1894 in view o f Division Bench Judgment of t his H on 'ble Court titled M/s Golden I ro n and Steel Forgings Vs. Unio n of In d ia and ors, 2011(4) R.C.R (Civ i l) 375and the judgment of Ho n 'ble Su p reme Court of India passed in U nion of India & others Vs Tar s em Si n gh & others (Civil Appeal N o. 7064/19), as the award d a ted

MOHMED ATIK 2025.09.15 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

2

CWP No.9472 of 2025 (O&M)

23.11.2020 (P-6) has become fi n al and has been implemente d by N H AI on 09.09.2023 in executio n proceedings or in the alterna ti ve, th e Id. Arbitrator may kindly be directed to decide the case o f the pe ti tioner for enhancement of c o mpensation keeping in view the ab o vesaid award dated 23.11.2020. (ii ) Issue any other appropriate, writ order or direction which t his H on ’ble Court may deem fit and p r oper to the facts and circumsta n ces of t he instant case.”

[2]. Le a rned counsel for the petitio n er submits that the matter for enhancement o f compensation was finally hea r d by the Arbitrator on 08.01.2 0 24, however the A w ard has not been pronounced so far. He further submits that the Arbitrator, wh o heard the matter stands t r ansferred. An application d a ted 19.11.2024 (A n nexure P-5) has been moved o n behalf of the petitioner for rehearing the mat t er in accordance with the law being covered with the Award d a ted 23.11.2020 (An n exure P-6) of the same village f or the same kind of land, howe v er, the said applica t ion is still pending consideratio n . [3]. Le a rned counsel further submits th a t, the petitioner would be satis fi ed, in case the p r esent Arbitrator is directed t o consider the application d a ted 19.11.2024 (An n exure P-5) and decide the case afresh in a time bound manner. [4]. Le a rned counsel appearing on b e half of the respondents raise no objection to the innocuous prayer made by lear n ed counsel for the petitioner. [5]. In v iew of above, the present petition is disposed of with the direc t ion to decide the a rbitration proceedings related to enhancement of compensa t ion pending before the learned Arbitrator within 0 2 months from today by taking i nto consideration t h e Award dated 23.11.2020 (An n exure P-6) passed in Case No.MA171 of 2011 titled ‘Waryam Singh vs. Union of India & others’ pertaining to the

same village.

MOHMED ATIK 2025.09.15 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

3

CWP No.9472 of 2025 (O&M)

[6]. It i s made clear that in case the lea r ned Arbitrator fails to conclude the arbitration proc e edings within the aforementioned period, the petitioner shall be entitled for liti g ation cost(s) of Rs.50,000/- to w ards delay in adjudication, w h ich shall be paid by respondent No.4.

[7]. Pe n ding application(s), if any shall also stand disposed of.

(HARKESH MANUJA) September 11, 2025 JUDGE Atik W h ether speaking/reasoned Ye s /No W h ether reportable Ye s /No

MOHMED ATIK 2025.09.15 14:26 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment