Birender Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.23011 of 2024 Date of Decision: 11.09.2024 Birender Singh and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:- Mr. Rahul Vohra, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional A.G., Haryana with Mr. Saurabh Mago, D.A.G., Haryana.

Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Kushaldeep K. Manchanda, Advocate and Mr. Siddhant Arora, Advocate for respondent No.3.

***** G.S. Sandhawalia, J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to press the writ petition as the reliance has been placed with the pleading upon a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Deepak Aggarwal and others vs. State of Haryana and others, 2008(1) RCR (Civil) 161 to challenge the acquisition proceedings which, apparently, was over-ruled way back by the Apex Court in HSIIDC and others vs. Deepak Aggarwal and others, 2022 SCC Onlice SC 932 on 28.07.2022.

2.

Even otherwise, learned counsel for the petitioners, now, very fairly points out that we have already decided on the issue of said NEETU RANI 2024.09.13 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

CWP No.23011 of 2024 -2notifications in question dated 10.01.2011 (Annexure P-1) and 17.08.2020 (Annexure P-10) and the Award, which was passed on 16.08.2022, in a bunch of cases, lead case of which was CWP No.13459 of 2021 titled as 'Nar Singh and others vs. State of Haryana and others'. The operative part reads as under: - "8. Resultantly, keeping in view the above once the case of the petitioners was solely based on the fact that Full Bench was in their favour and proceedings were deemed to have been lapsed under Section 24 of the 2013 Act, need not to be gone into any more, in view of the express declaration of law by the Apex Court. 9.

Accordingly, once the State has taken a categorical decision to acquire all the land as notified and not released any land in spite of Section 5A objections and there has been no exception, which would be clear from Section 6 notification, we do not find any plausible reason to interfere in the acquisition proceedings. The writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. All pending civil miscellaneous applications are also disposed off, accordingly."

3.

Resultantly, we dismiss the present writ petition. (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE 11.09.2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable:

No NEETU RANI 2024.09.13 15:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD