Ms. Anita Agarwal, the learned counsel for the respondents, opposed the appeal and supported the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge. She submitted that the offer given by the Executive Officer of the Municipal Board, Jhunjhunu, in the notice dated 03.12.1996 to pay the compensation at the rate of Rs.180/per square yard, was subject to the final decision of the City Monitoring Committee. The offer so given was in the form of show cause only for the purpose of placing the matter of the petitionerappellant before the City Monitoring Committee. The City Monitoring Committee headed by the District Collector, in its meeting dated 12.12.1996, taking note of the report of the Sub Registrar, Jhunjhunu, had rightly decided to pay to the petitionerappellant the compensation at the rate of Rs.80,000/- per bigha. The learned counsel referred to the letter dated 16.06.1997 sent by the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Jhunjhunu, whereby the petitioner-appellant was sent the amount of Rs.92,000/- as compensation vide Cheque No.352243 dated 02.06.1997 for acquisition of his land measuring 1 bigha and 3 biswa. It is argued that the DLC rate of the disputed land, as on that date was only Rs.50,000/- per bigha but considering that twenty-three years have gone by, the penal interest would also be paid to the petitioner-appellant. The rate was enhanced to Rs.80,000/- per bigha. The learned counsel referred to the additional affidavit of the Commissioner, Municipal Board, Jhunjhunu, which was filed before the learned Single Judge, to justify the payment of
