Allowed

Hari Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana Amd Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2008CWP/14865/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that paucity of funds is no excuse for non-payment of land compensation. Directed respondents to pay compensation within four weeks under Article 226, warning of contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondent to pay the compensation within four weeks from the date of the order, failing which the petitioners may file a contempt petition.

Hari Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana Amd Ors. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

C.W.P.No.14865 of 2007 Date of Decision:01--05-2008

¶3

Hari Singh and others

¶4

---Petitioners

¶5

vs.

¶6

State of Haryana and others

¶7

---Respondents

¶8

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶9

Present: Mr. S.S.Khurana, Advocate, for the petitioners

¶10

Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl. A.G.Haryana

¶11

M.M.KUMAR, J.

¶12

The prayer made by the petitioners in the instant petition is that a direction be issued to the respondents to grant compensation to them in respect of their respective land of which possession has been taken more than 3 decades back. They have claimed compensation in accordance with the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act').

¶13

It has been asserted that the land of the petitioners has been illegally taken more than 30 years ago. Details of the land have been given in respect of petitioner No. 1 in para 2 and in respect of petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in paras 3 and 4 of the petition. The petitioners have made averments that notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 12.1.1982 and

¶14

C.W.P.No.14865 of 2007

¶15

-2-

¶16

declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 7.4.1982 which were for acquisition of land for construction and remodeling of Nuh Drain from R.D. 25820 to 46700. Thereafter, the District Revenue Officer fixed the value of the land and award was announced. Reference has also been made to notification dated 16.9.1985 issued under Section 4 of the Act and declaration dated 16.7.1986 issued under Section 6 of the Act with regard to construction and remodeling of Nuh Drain from R.D. 46700 to 55906. Even the award in respect of the same land has been announced. Again a reference has been made to notification dated 4.3.1999 issued under Section 6 of the Act by invoking the provisions of Section 17 of the Act. The land appears to have been acquired even in the year 2001 and 2002 as has been mentioned in para 9 of the writ petition and thereafter on 22.8.2003 and 2.4.2004 as has been mentioned in para 10 the petition. The petitioners have also given the details of their land in paras 11, 12 and 13 of the writ petition, possession of which has been taken by the respondents,

¶17

In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5, in preliminary submissions No. 4, it has been admitted that the payment could not be made due to paucity of funds. Similar stand has been taken by the respondents in paras 6, 8, 9 and 10. However, in para 11 of the written statement it has been stated that a fresh notification is to be issued shortly as sanction of funds is likely to be received.

¶18

When the matter came up for consideration 25.4.2008, we have passed the following order:-

¶19

“Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out from paras 6,7 and 8 of the writ petition that compensation is not being

¶20

C.W.P.No.14865 of 2007

¶21

-3-

¶22

paid to them on account of paucity of funds. The land appears to have been acquired in the year 1985 and the petitioners are still agitating for disbursement of compensation. This is totally arbitrary.

¶23

Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana, states that he would speak to the authorities concerned and ensure that some thing is done within a week.

¶24

List again on 1.5.2008.

¶25

To be shown in the urgent list.”

¶26

Mr. Ashish Kapoor, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, sought further adjournment, which we considered unnecessary. The land of the petitioners looks to have been acquired long ago but no compensation has been paid to them. It is, therefore, directed that the compensation shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today and paucity of funds is no excuse to decline the payment of compensation to the petitioners. If the compensation is not paid within four weeks, then the petitioners shall be at liberty to take appropriate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the respondents.

¶27

Writ petition stands disposed of.

¶28

A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned State counsel

¶29

on payment of usual charges.

¶30

(M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE

¶31

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶32

May 01, 2008 paramjit

Hari Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana Amd Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana Amd Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhupinder Kumar Vs State Information Commission, Haryana and Ors.

Dharam Pal Vs State of Punjab etc.

Barmalt (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Hry. and Ors.

Bhinder Kumar Vs the State of Pb and Ors.

Bishamber and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

M/S Naurangabad Coop. Labour & Construction Vs State of Punjab and Ors.