Jagsir Singh Brar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others

CWP-18203-2026 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Item No.114 CWP-18203-2026
Date of Decision: 02.09.2026
Jagsir Singh Brar and others …Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others …Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present: - Dr. Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Raghav Gulati, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr. Puru Jarewal, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab
Ms. Lashika Singh, Advocate (through video conferencing) and
Mr. Mukesh Tomar, Advocate
for respondent Nos.4 and 5-NHAI
*
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J . (Oral)

1. The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227
of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to respondents to release
interest in terms of Section 80 of Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (for short ‘ 2013 Act ’) which accrued on the delayed payment of
compensation towards compulsory acquisition of land in terms of awards
dated 09.07.2021 (Annexure P-1) and 24.03.2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by
respondent No.2-Competent Authority for Land Acquisition.

2. The respondents issued notification dated 22.12.2020 under
Section 3A(1) of National Highways Act, 1956 (for short ‘ 1956 Act ’) for the
acquisition of land situated within the revenue estate of Village Dyalpura
Bhaika and Village Gaunspura, District Bathinda. Respondent No.2 by way
of awards dated 09.07.2021 and 24.03.2023 acquired the land. The
MOHIT KUMAR
2026.09.03 13:28
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-18203-2026 -2-
respondents took physical possession of the acquired land without disbursing
the compensation. The landowners approached this Court by way of
CWP No.19297 of 2025 seeking release of compensation amount which was
disposed of vide order dated 02.02.2026 with a direction to the respondents
to release the compensation amount. They vide representation dated
04.05.2026 addressed to respondents sought interest on the delayed payment
but the same has not been decided till date.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that land was
acquired vide notification dated 22.12.2020 issued under Section 3A of 1956
Act. The Collector passed awards on 09.07.2021 and 24.03.2023. The
respondent paid partial amount in 2023, however, remaining amount i.e.
₹
2.54 Crores was paid in 2026. The respondent was liable to pay interest
under Section 80 for the delayed payment of compensation because
possession was taken in 2023.

4. Per contra , learned State counsel submits that possession of the
acquired land was taken in 2024. The undisputed amount was released in
2023, however, remaining amount could not be released because of dispute
of consolidation. The Director, Consolidation of Holdings, Punjab
determined the dispute vide order dated 15.10.2025. On the basis of
aforesaid order, the Revenue Officer made correction in LA-7 Register by
way of mutation dated 06.02.2026. The petitioner supplied requisite
documents on 09.02.2026 and compensation was released on 23.02.2026.
There was no delay on the part respondent-State.

5. Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
there was lapse on the part of Revenue Authority which did not adjudicate
MOHIT KUMAR
2026.09.03 13:28
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-18203-2026 -3-
their dispute under Section 42 of East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and
Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (for short ‘ 1948 Act ’)

6. Heard the arguments and perused the record.

7. A perusal of the record reveals that respondent paid partial
assessed compensation in 2023. Remaining compensation which comes to
₹
2.54 Crores was paid in 2026. The respondent in its reply has candidly
submitted that there was dispute between the parties. The matter was
pending before competent authority under Section 42 of 1948 Act. The
petitioners filed CWP No.19297 of 2025 before this Court wherein
cognizance of pendency of consolidation proceedings was taken. The
Director, Land Records, Punjab was asked to file status report of
proceedings under Section 42. The Director, Consolidation vide order dated
15.10.2025 allowed correction of consolidation record qua land in question.
Order dated 15.10.2025 passed by Director, Consolidation of Holdings
resolved the matter. The jurisdictional Revenue Officer incorporated
necessary correction in LA-7 Register vide entry dated 06.02.2026. The
petitioner submitted complete documents on 09.02.2026 and respondent
released compensation on 23.02.2026.
The afore-stated sequence of events reveals that there was no
lapse on the part of respondents. The compensation could not be released on
account of dispute of consolidation. Had the respondent released
compensation, there could arise multiple issues and may lead to litigation. It
could adversely affect rights of the petitioners. The respondent could be
asked to pay interest had there been lapse on its part. By paying partial
compensation where there was no dispute, the respondent expressed its bona
MOHIT KUMAR
2026.09.03 13:28
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.

CWP-18203-2026 -4-
fide intention. There was no occasion to delay when almost 50%
compensation was paid within time.

8. In the wake of above discussion and findings, this Court is of
the considered opinion that present petition deserves to be dismissed and
accordingly dismissed.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
JUDGE
02.09.2026
Mohit Kumar
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No

MOHIT KUMAR
2026.09.03 13:28
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.