High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/24342/2014disposed of

Inder Singh & ORS v. State Of Haryana & ANR

2015-05-14Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta,Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh17 pages

-1Inder Singh and others ....Petitioners.

Mr. Satyapal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Piyush Khanna, Advocate for respondent No.3, (in CWP No. 25177 of 2014).

This order shall dispose of a bunch of 15 petitions bearing CWP Nos. 24342, 24429, 24480, 24492, 24608, 24800, 24801, 24803, 24904, 24943, 25132, 25177, 25148, 25192 and 25328 of 2014 as according to the learned counsel for the parties, similar issues are involved therein and arise from the one and the same notification. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No. 24342 of 2014. 2.

Short replies on behalf of respondent No.2 in CWP Nos. 24342, 24943, 25148, 25132 and 25328 of 2014 filed today in Court are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. 3.

By way of instant petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the entire acquisition issued vide notifications dated 17.11.2005 (Annexure P-4) issued under Section 4 of

-2the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short "the Act"), dated 7.2.2006 (Annexure P-5) under Section 6 of the Act and the award dated 2.3.2006 qua their land, having lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "2013 Act"). 4.

The petitioners are owners in possession of the land measuring 26 kanal 2 marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Badh Khalsa, District Sonepat. Government of Haryana vide notification dated 17.11.2005 (Annexure P-4) issued under Section 4 of the Act followed by notification dated 7.2.2006 (Annexure P-5) under Section 6 of the Act, acquired 2006.50 acres of land situated in nine adjoining villages, i.e. village Bahalgarh 4.83 acres, Khewra 8.47 acres, Asawarpur 515.13 acres, Ferozepur Khadar 121.37 acres, Badh Malik 5.93 acres, Sewli 643.79 acres, Patla 370.67 acres, Jakholi 54.13 acres for the public purpose, namely, for the development and utilization of the land as commercial, institutional and residential area for sectors 65 to 68, Sonepat and also included 282.33 acres of land of village Badh Khalsa Hadbast No.

41 including the land of the petitioners. The award was passed on 2.3.2006. The petitioners are still in physical possession of the land in dispute. No compensation has been paid to them. According to the petitioners, the acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. Hence, the present writ petition. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in physical possession of the land in dispute. No compensation has been paid to them. It was claimed that in such circumstances, in view of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act had lapsed. It was further submitted

-3that since no demand notice claiming the relief as claimed in respect of lapse of notifications has been filed with the respondents, liberty be granted to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the appropriate authority by incorporating the grievance as raised in the present writ petition, however, direction be issued to the authority concerned to decide the representation expeditiously in a time bound manner in accordance with law. 6.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of all the writ petitions by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation raising all the pleas as raised in the present writ petitions before the appropriate authority. It is directed that in the event of a representation(s) being filed by the petitioners within a period of two months from today, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to them within a period of four months from the date of receipt of representation(s). The petitioners shall be entitled to lead any evidence to substantiate their claim before the concerned authority. Till the matter is decided by the said authority, status quo shall be maintained by the parties. It is, however, made clear that in case no such representation(s) is filed within the stipulated period as noticed above, the interim order shall cease to operate, thereafter.

-4- CWP No. 25177 of 2014 Raj Pal ....Petitioner.

Mr. Satyapal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Khanna, Advocate for respondent No.3.

-5- CWP No. 24800 of 2014 Sumander Singh and others ....Petitioners.

Mr. Satyapal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioners.

-6- CWP No. 24801 of 2014 Ram Kumar and others ....Petitioners.

Mr. Satyapal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioners.

-7- CWP No. 24803 of 2014 Phool Singh and others ....Petitioners.

Mr. Satyapal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioners.

-8- CWP No. 24904 of 2014 Mahinder ....Petitioner.