Om Parkash And ORS. v. State Of Haryana And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.13038 of 2016.

Date of Decision: July 08, 2016 Om Parkash and others ......Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DARSHAN SINGH.

*** Present: Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.R.D.Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. -.-

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J . (Oral) Notice of motion.

On our asking, Mr.R.D.Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Let four copies of the writ petition be supplied to learned State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioners are residents of village Chikanwas, Tehsil and District Hisar. Their land has been acquired for widening of National Highway No.10 between Hisar and Dabwali. Their grievance is that due to MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.07.19 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No.13038 of 2016 [2] pendency of a writ petition to which they were not parties, inordinate delay has been caused in releasing the compensation to them. On this premise, they claim interest @ 24% per annum.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector-respondent No.4 is under obligation to determine whether: (i) there has been delay in releasing the compensation amount, (ii) and if so, how such delay is attributable to the petitioners? Needless to say that if the petitioners are not at fault, they are entitled to interest at the rate prescribed in the Statute. We thus dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.4 to determine the above-stated claim of the petitioners and if the petitioners are found entitled to, release the due amount to them within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT] JUDGE July 08, 2016 [DARSHAN SINGH] mohinder JUDGE MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.07.19 14:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh