JAWAID NAWAZ KHAN GANDAPUR, J.---Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that 14 years back the appellant (Collector, Land Acquisition, Nowshera) acquired the land belonging to the respondents for the Armoured Corps Centre (Pakistan Army), Nowshera, after taking the usual proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide his Award dated 15-6-1982. The detail of the land, so acquired, is as under:--- Area of landKind of land Acquiring price (a)702 K. 18 M.Barani Rs.970.80 per Kanal (b)272 K. 3 M Banjer QadeemRs.976.00 per Kanal (c)329 K. 8 M.Banjer Jadid Rs.976.00 per Kanal (d)101 K. 9 M. Ghair MumkinRs.488.00 per Kanal
2. The respondents not contented with the Award challenged the same by filing objection petition.
Resultantly, the Collector referred the matter,- under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to the Land Acquisition Judge, Nowshera (hereinafter called the Referee Judge) for determination of market value of the land in question.
3. Before the Referee Judge the respondents attacked the said Award on variety of grounds. They pleaded that the Award was fenciful/illegal as the Collector .Had not applied his judicial mind by ignoring to take notice of the "potential value" of the land acquired which, undisputedly, was centrally located, i.e., on the road near the Industrial/residential area at Nowshera. Besides, it was contended that the respondents were entitled to get compulsory acquisition charges @ 25 % and not @ 15 % as awarded by the Collector.
4. The objection petition, filed by the respondents, was vehemently resisted by the appellant on various grounds legal as well as factual. The pleadings of the parties were accordingly reduced to the following issues:---
(1) Whether petitioners have got a cause of action?
(2) Whether the petition is within time?
(3) Whether the petitioners are estopped to bring this petition?
(4) Whether the compensation assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector in respect of the property in dispute vide his Award iii question is wrong?
(5) What was the market value of the land acquired at the time of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act?
(6) Relief.
5. After recording the evidence of the parties, which they wished to produce in support of their respective claims and hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Referee Judge, by his judgment dated 15-6-1991, accepted the respondents' plea and enhanced the price of the acquired land (various categories) from Rs.976 per Kanal etc. To Rs.2,999.80 per Kanal.. The Collector was directed to make payment to the respondents @ Rs.2,999.80 per kanal regardless of the kinds/types of land. The respondents were also declared to be entitled to receive compulsory acquisition charges/interest, at the enhanced rate, .As permissible under the law.
6. 'Aggrieved by the said verdict, recorded on 15-6-1991, the Collector has challenged the validity of the same by filing this appeal, through the learned Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P.
7. We have heard Mr. Saifur Rehman Khan Kiyani,, learned Advocate---General for the appellant and Mr. Naqshband Khan Advocate, the learned counsel for the respondents and have had the advantage of going through the record of the case with their able assistance.
8. It may be stated at the outset that the learned Advocate-General has patently failed to point out any irregularity or illegality committed by the Referee Judge He has also failed to convince us that the impugned decision was either arbitrary, i.e. It exhibited lack of application of mind or that the Referee judge had over looked the material evidence before him, as a result of which, he had misdirected himself in arriving at a -wrong conclusion thereby making the same as "perverse"
9. On the other hand, the re-appraisal of the evidence by us has also led us to the same conclusion. The Land Acquisition Judge has not only taken into consideration the mutations and the yearly average price (Exh. PW 1 /4) of the land in question and produced by the Patwari Hal4a but has also considered mutations (Exh.P.W.2/2 to Exh. P.W.2/7) produced by one of the respondents, Malik Shahwas Khan, while determining the market value of the land. Similarly, he has taken note of the two Awards dated 15-6-1982 and dated 17-3-1985 (Exh.PW2/8). It is true that one of the Award (dated 17-3-1985) would not help the respondents in this case as the same was announced latter in time, however, the Award dated 15-6-1982, would show that the market value of the acquired land was fixed at Rs.2,999.80 per Kanal vide. This Award. The property acquired by the Award (15-6-1982), it may be noted, is also situated near the Nowshera Cantt. And is located oh the main road. The Referee Judge, after considering all the factors, came to the following conclusion:--- "As the land is situated adjacent to the Cantonment Area is close to the Abadi and has also been acquired for the residential purpose, therefore, the agricultural purpose of the land is not very crucial for determining the market value fixed of the Mera type of land in the other award announced on 15-6-1982 in which even notification under section 4 was issued in the present case and fix the market value of all kind of lands to be Rs.2.999.80 per Kanal."
10. We are of the view that the Referee Judge has appreciated/evaluated the available evidence properly and has come to a correct conclusion. His decision is neither vague/capricious nor fanciful. On the contrary the enhancement is quite legal. Needless to mention that the price spiral which is going upwards, almost daily, in respect of the land situated close to road/Industrial or residential areas cannot be brushed aside from over consideration. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the enhancement is both equitable and fair. No legal infirmity is involved therein
11. Upon this stand-point, we do not find ourselves persuaded to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment of the Referee Judge. The impugned decision cannot be over-turned nor can be termed as illegal and/or void. This appeal is devoid of any substance and is accordingly rejected with costs.