Gursharan Kaur & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ORS

CWP No. 21846 of 2016 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 21846 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 11.05.2017 Gursharan Kaur and others ..... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ..... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

RAJESH BINDAL, J.

The petitioners have approached this Court claiming the relief that the acquisition of land owned by them has elapsed in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short 'the 2013 Act'). Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the 1894 Act') was issued on 02.05.2001 (Annexure P-2). It was followed by notification under Section 6 issued under the 1894 Act on 30.04.2002 (Annexure P-3). The award was announced by the Collector on 27.04.2004 (Annexure P-4). It is not disputed that the petitioners have already received the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector. Except the bald statement that the petitioners are in physical possession of the land, nothing has been placed on record to substantiate the plea. The land is lying Rishu Kataria 2017.07.03 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CWP No. 21846 of 2016 (O&M) -2- 'barren'. The petitioners had not raised any construction thereon which may be existing prior to the acquisition.

As none of the conditions laid down in Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act have been satisfied, there is no ground to entertain the petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.

( RAJESH BINDAL ) JUDGE May 11, 2017 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Rishu Kataria 2017.07.03 14:20 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document