Dismissed

Goyal Estate and Prom. Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC31 Oct 2011CWP/14339/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed discussion on reporting the judgment. It dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of land acquisition notifications because the petitioners illegally encroached on land, violating urban planning and road restriction acts, making them ineligible for equitable relief.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; directions for quashing notifications refused on ground of illegal encroachment.

Goyal Estate and Prom. Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs State… — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

CWP No.14339 of 2011 (O&M)

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.14339 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 31.10.2011

¶5

Goyal Estate and Promoters Pvt. Ltd. and others

¶6

..... Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Haryana and others

¶9

..... Respondents

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA

¶11

Present: Mr. Navin Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

M.M. KUMAR, ACJ.

¶15

The prayer made in the instant petition is for issuance of a direction for quashing of a notification dated 21.12.2009 (Annexure P-7) and dated 17.12.2010 (Annexure P-11) issued under Sections 4 and 6 respectively of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A further prayer for quashing all consequential proceedings has also been made.

¶16

It has come on record that the petitioners have set up illegal colony on the land in question by violating the provisions of the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 and the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975. In the interlocutory order dated 08.08.2011, the aforesaid fact has been recorded and the opinion has been expressed that on account of violation of law for which even prosecution has been provided, the petitioners would not be entitled to get any relief in equitable

¶17

CWP No.14339 of 2011 (O&M)

¶18

-2-

¶19

jurisdiction of this Court. The matter was adjourned for today because some other matter has also been pending.

¶20

After going through the record and the averment made in the application filed by the petitioners, aforesaid violation of various provisions of the Acts has been affirmed and there is no denial of the same.

¶21

Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.

¶22

(M.M. KUMAR) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶23

(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE

¶24

31.10.2011 manju

Goyal Estate and Prom. Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goyal Estate and Prom. Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v. State of Haryana and 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

Heena Sharma and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Vijay Ghai Vs Union of India and Others

Ishwar Chand Vs Uhbvn & Ors.

Ascons (Delhi) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Haryana

Gurmukh Singh and Anr. Vs Land Acquisition Collector/Officer and Anr.

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.