High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/8499/2018disposed of

Krishan Kumar v. State Of Haryana And ORS

2018-04-23Mr. Justice Dr. Ravi Ranjan2 pages

Shivani Gupta 2018.04.26 10:35 CWP No. 8499 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8499 of 2018 Date of decision: 23.04.2018 Krishan Kumar ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

Present:

Mr. Amit Choudhary, Advocate, for the petitioners.

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral) The present order shall dispose of three writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 8499, 8501 and 8528 of 2018, since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. Reference is being made to CWP No. 8499 of 2018, Krishan Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others. The petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to continue to pay the instrument of annuity on account of the acquisition of land in accordance with the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy dated 07.12.2007 (Annexure P-1) and 09.11.2010 (Annexure P-2). At the outset, counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that he would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to decide the legal notice dated 25.01.2018 (Annexure P-3) filed by the petitioners within a fixed time frame.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, AAG, Haryana accepts notice. Copies

CWP No. 8499 of 2018 of the writ petitions have been supplied to him. Keeping in view the above and the fact that the matter is still pending consideration, the present writ petition is disposed of without calling upon the respondents to file written statement since it will only delay the matter, with a direction to respondent no. 3 to take a decision on the legal notice 25.01.2018 (Annexure P-3) within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

In case there is no dispute for the continuation of the annuity payment, the amount shall be credited to the accounts of the petitioners at the earliest and the issue of benefit of interest also be kept in mind by the said respondent in view of the judgment of the Division Bench in CWP No. 1445 of 2015, M/s. Pagoda Developer LLP vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 18.03.2015 (Annexure P-4) while deciding the same. Needless to say if the benefit is to be declined, a reasoned order be passed and the same be conveyed to the petitioners.

23.04.2018 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No