Allowed

Chandra and Ors. v. State of Haryana etc.

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Jul 2008CWP/11096/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ challenging a notification and declaration under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They retreated the challenge to acquisition and sought directions for land release under a State policy. The Court allowed the prayer and directed the respondents to decide within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners' prayer for directions regarding release of land under State policy was allowed. Respondents directed to decide within four weeks of receipt of representation.

Chandra and Ors. Vs State of Haryana etc. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

CWP No. 11096 of 2008 Date of decision:2.7.2008

Chandra and others

......Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.......Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR

¶9

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶10

Present: Mr.S.K.Wadhwan, Advocate, for Mr.N.D.Achint, Advocate, the petitioners.

JUDGMENT

M.M.KUMAR, J.

The prayer made by the petitioners in the instant petition is for quashing of notification dated 3.10.2006 (Annexure P-21) issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act') and declaration dated 1.10.2007 (Annexure P-25) made under Section 6 of the Act. In so far as the land belonging to the petitioners has been acquired, it is admitted case of the petitioners that no award has so far been passed.

¶15

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners would give up challenge to the acquisition proceedings and they would be satisfied if directions are issued to the respondents to consider their case for release of their land in pursuance to the State policy, which reads thus:-

¶16

CWP No. 11096 of 2008

¶17

-2-

¶18

“(1) No request will be considered after one year of award. Only those requests will be considered by the Governments where objections under Section 5-A were filed.

¶19

(2) Any request or application where structures have been constructed will only be considered for the release under Section 48(1) provided the structure exists prior to Section 4 and is inhabited.

¶20

(3) Any factory or commercial establishment which existed prior to Section 4 will be considered for release.

¶21

(4) Any religious institution or any building owned by community will also be considered for release.

¶22

(5) Any land in respect of which an application under Section 3 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975, has been made by the owners prior to the award for converting the land into a colony, may also be considered for release subject to the condition that the ownership of the land should be prior to the notification under Section 4 of the Act.

¶23

(6) That the Government may also consider release of land in the interest of integrated and planned development for the lands where the owners have approached the Hon'ble Courts and have obtained stay dispossession.

¶24

Provided that the Government may release

¶25

-3-

¶26

CWP No. 11096 of 2008

¶27

any land on the grounds other than stated above under Section 48(1) of the Act under exceptionally justifiable circumstances for the reasons to be recorded in writing.” Notice of motion.

¶28

Mr.Ashish Kapoor, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice. Two copies of the paper book have been handed over to him.

¶29

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that in similar circumstances, this Court on 17.12.2007 had passed an order in CWP No.16396 of 2007 while disposing of the petition by issuing directions to consider the request of those petitioners to be made by way of a representation under Section 48 of the Act for release of the constructed portion with proportionate vacant space in terms of the aforementioned policy, we also accept the prayer made by the petitioners. We also notice the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have given up challenge to the acquisition proceedings and have confined their prayer for release of their land in terms of the policy. Let the decision be taken in accordance with the policy within four weeks from the date of receipt of a representation with a copy of this order.

¶30

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶31

(M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE

¶32

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶33

July 02, 2008 anita

Chandra and Ors. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra and Ors. v. State of Haryana etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tripta Devi and Ors. Vs Secretary Deptt. of Excise and Ors.

Areva T&D India Ltd. Vs Power Grid Corp. of India Ltd.

Rajinder Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

H.S.Grewal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Om Parkash Chaudhary Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Dharambir and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.