Lal Chand And ORS v. State Of Haryana And ORS

CWP No. 2938 of 2015 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 2938 of 2015 Date of Decision: 13.5.2015 Lal Chand and others ....Petitioners.

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL.

PRESENT: Mr. Mukesh Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sudeep Mahajan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

1.

In this writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 30.4.2011 (Annexure P-3) and grant the compensation to the petitioners for their land which was acquired vide notification dated 17.4.2006 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short "the Act") followed by notification dated 23.4.2007 (Annexure P-2) under Section 6 of the Act for constructing Karala via Israna Ki Dhani, Rambass, Dhana Manpura Road, District Mahendergarh.

2.

The land of the petitioners was acquired for Kakrala via Israna Ki Dhani, Rambass, Dhana Manpura Road constituency, District Mahendergarh vide notification dated 27.4.2006 (Annexure P-1) issued GURBACHAN SINGH 2015.05.18 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CWP No. 2938 of 2015 -2under Section 4 of the Act followed by notification dated 23.4.2007 (Annexure P-2) under Section 6 of the Act. No compensation has been paid to the petitioners. The petitioners were dispossessed from the land in question at the time of acquisition. They moved a representation dated 30.4.2011 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.3 for grant of compensation of the acquired land, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have moved a representation dated 30.4.2011 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No.3, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

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 the present petition by directing respondent No.3 to decide the representation dated 30.4.2011 (Annexure P-3), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. It is further directed that in case it is found that the petitioners are entitled to the amount of compensation, the same be paid to them along with interest within next one month.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE May 13, 2015 (REKHA MITTAL) gbs JUDGE GURBACHAN SINGH 2015.05.18 16:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh