Disposed

Dharambeer @ Dharamveer Singh v. Chief Administrator, HUDA and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Apr 2013CWP/20600/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking payment of land acquisition compensation, directing respondents to disburse the sanctioned amount within two weeks after the order becomes certified, leaving quantum disputes for appropriate statutory remedy.

What did the court decide?

Payment sanctioned in Annexure R-1/1 to be disbursed within two weeks of receipt of certified copy of the order.

Dharambeer @ Dharamveer Singh Vs Chief… — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

::1::

¶2

CWP No.20600 of 2012 (O & M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.20600 of 2012 (O & M) Date of Decision: April 30, 2013

¶5

Dharambeer @ Dharamveer Singh

¶6

....Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Chief Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority and others

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA

¶11

Present: Mr.Madan Pal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Ms. Rohini Bedi, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

¶13

Mr. S.S. Pattar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. ********

¶14

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶15

Short reply on behalf of respondent No.1 has been filed in Court today, which is taken on record subject to all just exceptions.

¶16

The petitioner in the present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking release of the payment in respect of the award dated 18^th May, 2011 passed by respondent No.2 in pursuance to an application filed by the petitioner under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') relating to the land of the petitioner which had been acquired as per the provisions of the Act.

¶17

In the reply filed by respondent No.1, it has been stated that the sanction has been accorded to the Land Acquisition Collector, Panchkula, for payment of `1,27,29,786/- against the enhanced compensation in respect of the claim of the petitioner, subject to deduction of TDS under the Income Tax Act, 1961. A copy of the office order dated 22.02.2013 has been appended as Annexure R-1/1 alongwith the reply. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that

¶18

::2::

¶19

CWP No.20600 of 2012 (O & M)

¶20

the quantum of compensation, which has been awarded, is not in consonance with the award.

¶21

Section 28-A(3) of the Act provides that any person who has not accepted the award under sub-section(2) thereof is entitled to file a written application to the Collector for requiring him to make a reference for determination of the Court and provision of Sections 18 to 28 of the Act would apply as if it was a reference under Section 18 of the Act.

¶22

Under the circumstances, the present petition is disposed of. In case, the petitioner has any grievance relating to quantum of compensation, it shall be open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy available to him in accordance with law.

¶23

Needless to say that the amount sanctioned vide Annexure R-1/1, shall be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

¶24

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

(G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE

¶27

April 30, 2013 sukhpreet

Dharambeer @ Dharamveer Singh v. Chief Administrator, HUDA and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharambeer @ Dharamveer Singh v. Chief Administrator, HUDA 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

M/S Unicon Builders & Contractors Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Madan Lal and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

All India Council for Technical Education and Anr. Vs Khalsa College Asr of Technology & Business and Ors.

Bijja Singh Vs State of Haryana

Jagdish & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Jagdish Nagar and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.