29. In so far as, issue no. 2 is concerned, the deduction to be made towards development of the land depends on various factors and there cannot be a straight jacket formula. Laying down the principles for deduction to be made towards the development of the land vis-a-vis largeness of area, this Court in the case of Bhagwanthulla Samanna & Ors. vs. Special Tehsildar and Land Acquisition Officer, (1991) 4 SCC 506 observed as under :-

“In applying the principle it is necessary to consider all relevant facts. It is not the extent of the area covered under the acquisition, the only relevant factor. Even in the vast area there may be land which is fully developed having all amenities and situated in an advantageous position. If smaller area within the large tract is already developed and suitable for building purposes and have in its vicinity roads, drainage, electricity, communications etc. then the principle of deduction simply for the reason that it is part of the large tract acquired, may not be justified.

“…..If the larger tract of land because of advantageous position is capable of being used for the purpose for which the smaller plots are used and is also situated in a developed area with little or no requirement of further development, the principle of deduction of the value for purpose of comparison is not warranted.”

30. A two-Judge Bench of this Court in the case of Lal Chand vs. Union of India & Anr., (2009) 15 SCC 769 observed that the deduction towards development can range from 20% to 75%, depending on various factors. The Court has observed as under:-

“13. The percentage of “deduction for development” to be made to arrive at the market value of large tracts of undeveloped agricultural land (with potential for development), with reference to the sale price of small developed plots, varies between 20% to 75% of the price of such developed plots, the percentage depending upon the nature of development of the layout in which the exemplar plots are situated.

14. The “deduction for development” consists of two components. The first is with reference to the area required to be utilized for developmental works and the second is the cost of the development works. For example, if a residential layout is formed by DDA or similar statutory authority, it may utilize around 40% of the land area in the layout, for roads, drains, parks, playgrounds and civic amenities (community facilities), etc.….

20. Therefore the deduction for the “development factor” to be made with reference to the price of a small plot in a developed layout, to arrive at the cost of undeveloped land, will be far more than the deduction with reference to the price of a small plot in an unauthorized private layout or an industrial layout. It is also well known that the development cost incurred by statutory agencies is much higher than the cost incurred by private developers, having regard to higher overheads and expenditure.”

31. In the case of Charan Dass (Dead) by LRs. vs. H.P. Housing & Urban Development Authority & Ors., (2010) 13 SCC 398 this Court has observed as under :-

“32. It is well settled that it is not every case that deduction towards development charges has to be made when a big chunk of land is acquired for housing colonies, etc., where the acquired land falls in the midst of an already developed land with amenities of roads, electricity, etc., deduction on this account may not be warranted. At the same time, where all civic and other amenities are to be provided to make it suitable for building purposes or under the local building regulations setting apart of some portion of the lands for providing common facilities is mandatory, an appropriate deduction may be justified….”

32. The same view has been reiterated by this Court in the case of Noida Vs. Surendra Singh, 2015 SCC OnLine ALL 5945 as under :-

“57. With respect to determination of rate of Rs.135/- there is no ground that this by itself is bad. The next and last ground taken in these appeals is that there should not have been any deduction. To this extent, we find substance that the land in question was situated in an area which was already sufficiently developed, and land was being sold there in square yards. There was thus no justification to apply any deduction, whatsoever, since it is not a rule of thumb that in every case deduction must be applied.”

33. The principles culled out from the above pronouncements clearly go to show that whether there should be any deduction or not and the ratio of deduction depends upon the evidence to be brought on record by the parties in respect of the land under acquisition.

34. It stands settled that if there is a large tract of land under acquisition but is capable of being used for the purpose for which smaller plots are used and is situate in a fully developed area with little or no requirement of any further development to be made, there would be no need for deduction of the value. Similarly, when all civic and other amenities are to be provided to make the land under acquisition suitable for the purpose for which it is being acquired setting aside some part of the land for development like roads, drainage, electricity, communication providing for common facilities and appropriate deduction, is liable to be made.