Sunil Devi & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Mr. Gaurav Garg, AAG, Haryana. DEEPAK GUPTA, J. **** This appeal under Sec/on 54 of the Land Acquisi/on Act has been filed seeking enhancement of compensa/on awarded for the acquired land of the appellants. The appeal is accompanied by applica/on bearing CM-5289-CI-2023 under Sec/on 5 of the Limita/on Act to condone the delay of 2298 days in filing the appeal

2. The perusal of the paper-book would reveal that 16.37 acres of land situated in village Pawala Khusrupur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, which included the land of the appellants, was acquired for development and u/liza/on of the same for sector roads of 99 to 115 at Gurugram. No/fica/on under Sec/on 4 of the Land Acquisi/on Act for this purpose was issued on 13.01.2010 followed by no/fica/on dated 25.01.2010 under Sec/on 6 of the Act. Collector, vide his award No.75 dated 31.03.2010 determined the market value of the acquired land at ₹60,00,000/- per acre.

3. Various landowners sought references including the appellants. The Reference Court enhanced the compensa/on to YOGESH MEHTA 2026.04.21 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1830-2023 (O&M) [2] ₹1,71,06,462/- per acre apart from other statutory benefits. Not sa/sfied with the same, various appeals were preferred before this Court. A co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 23.10.2019 passed in RFA-7824-2013 /tled ‘Vivek Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others’ (Annexure A-2) along with various other connected appeals, assessed the market value at ₹4,78,79,070/- per acre along with the statutory benefits.

4. It is submiHed by the appellants that the reference under Sec/on 18 of the Act was filed by them along with Suresh and others. They were impleaded as pe//oner Nos.7 and 8 in the said reference pe//on. AIer the decision of the Reference Court, Suresh and others filed RFA- 5627-2015, wherein they (present appellants) were impleaded as proforma respondents No.5 and 6. It is submiHed that they had handed over all the relevant documents to the counsel engaged by the other appellants but due to some misunderstanding, appeal was not filed on their behalf. It is only aIer the decision by this Court that the appellants came to know that the appeal on their behalf had not been filed and so, they have filed the present appeal with a delay of 2298 days. With these submissions, prayer is made for condoning the delay.

5. In reply to the applica/on, the State of Haryana has strongly opposed the condoning of the delay, submiKng that there is no jus/fica/on.

6. At the /me of hearing, counsel for the appellant was not present. Learned State counsel has been heard and the record has been perused.

7. It has not been disputed by learned State counsel that the case is fully covered by judgment dated 23.10.2019 in RFA-7824-2013 /tled ‘Vivek Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others’. YOGESH MEHTA 2026.04.21 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1830-2023 (O&M) [3]

8. In the aforesaid circumstances, the ques/on is whether the delay of 2298 days in filing this appeal should be condoned, par/cularly when the appellants were impleaded as proforma respondents in other appeal filed by other appellants with whom, they had filed the reference pe//on.

9. It is by now well established that in cases involving compulsory acquisi/on of land, courts are required to adopt a liberal and jus/ce-ori- ented approach while considering applica/ons for condona/on of delay. The underlying ra/onale is that a landowner, who has been deprived of his property by the State, cannot be denied just compensa/on merely on ac- count of delay, par/cularly when other similarly situated landowners have already been granted enhanced compensa/on.

10. The principle of parity assumes considerable significance in such maHers. Denial of the same compensa/on to landowners, whose lands are covered by the very same no/fica/on would result in an anomal- ous and inequitable situa/on, offending not only the concept of fairness but also the equality clause enshrined in Ar/cle 14 of the Cons/tu/on. Further, the right to property under Ar/cle 300-A, though no longer a fundamental right, con/nues to be a valuable cons/tu/onal right, which mandates that depriva/on thereof must be accompanied by just, fair and reasonable com- pensa/on.

11. At the same /me, the courts have evolved a balanced ap- proach to safeguard the interests of the State by denying interest for the period of delay, thereby ensuring that while substan/ve jus/ce is done, the financial burden arising out of inordinate delay is not unjustly imposed upon the State. Reference may be made to Collector, Land Acquisi(cid:30)on, Anand Nag & Nr. Vs. Mst. Ka(cid:30)ji & Ors, (1987) 2 SCC 107; Delhi Air Tech YOGESH MEHTA 2026.04.21 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1830-2023 (O&M) [4] Services Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. & Anr., 2022 SCC Online SC 1408; and Coffee Board, Karnataka v. Commissioner of Commercial Tax, (1988) 3 SCC

12. In Dhiraj Singh (D) through LRs etc. v. State of Haryana & Ors., (2014) 14 SCC 127; and in Market Commi4ee, Hodal v. Krishan Murari & Ors., (1996) 1 SCC 311, long delays, running into several thousand days, were condoned by Supreme Court precisely to maintain parity between similarly situated landowners. Likewise, in Huchanagouda v. Assistant Commissioner & LAO, (2020) 19 SCC 234, while condoning long delays, Hon’ble Supreme Court balanced the equi/es by denying interest for the delayed period. The recent reitera/on of these principles is found in Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors. (2025 INSC 550), where Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated that delay alone cannot deprive a landowner of compensa/on that is otherwise lawfully due.

13. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, it is evident that the delay in filing the appeals cannot be said to be deliberate or mala fide. More importantly, refusal to condone the delay would result in denial of compensa/on at par with other landowners, whose lands were acquired under the same no/fica/on and who have already been granted enhanced compensa/on by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Such a course would be legally untenable.

14. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeals is condoned, subject to the condi/on that the appellants shall not be en/tled to interest on the enhanced compensa/on for the period of delay. Merits of the Appeals

15. Turning to the merits of the case, it is not disputed that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the judg- YOGESH MEHTA 2026.04.21 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RFA-1830-2023 (O&M) [5] ment of the this Court dated 23.10.2019 passed in RFA-7824-2013 /tled ‘Vivek Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others’. The acquisi/on, the no/fic- a/ons, the award, and the subsequent adjudica/ons are common. There is no dis/nguishing feature, which would jus/fy denial of the benefit of the said judgment to the present appellants.

16. Once the market value of the land acquired under the same no/fica/on has been finally determined by this Court, the principle of final- ity coupled with parity leaves no room for any further adjudica/on on the issue. The appellants are, therefore, en/tled to compensa/on at the rate of ₹4,78,79,070/- per Acre, as has been awarded in the aforesaid judgment, along with all statutory benefits admissible under the Land Acquisi/on Act,

17. In view of the above discussion, the appeals are allowed. The appellants shall be en/tled to an enhanced compensa/on in terms of the judgment dated 23.10.2019 passed by this Court in Vivek Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others (supra), along with all consequen/al statutory be- nefits. However, they shall not be en/tled to any interest for the period of delay, as no/ced hereinabove.

18. The appeals stand disposed of in the above terms. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases.

21.04.2026 Yogesh (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Yes/No Whether reportable:- Uploaded on: 21.04.2026 YOGESH MEHTA 2026.04.21 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document