Disposed

Kamlesh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Nov 2013CWP/25445/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, relying on a previous decision that quashed similar notifications, disposed of the writ petition without deciding merits, directing the State to consider the petitioners' claim for the release of acquired land within four months while maintaining status quo.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioners' claim for release of acquired property within four months; status quo regarding possession maintained until speaking order passes.

Kamlesh & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.25445 of 2013

¶3

Date of Decision : November 20, 2013

Kamlesh and another

.....Petitioners

versus

The State of Haryana and others

¶8

.....Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA.

¶10

Present : Mr.Ved Parkash, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana.

¶11

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 2 only.

¶18

On our asking, Ms.Palika Monga, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf.

¶19

Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State Counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for nonprosecution.

¶20

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, neither respondent No.3 is required to be served nor any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1 & 2 is required at this stage.

¶21

The petitioners challenge the notifications dated 23.08.2007 (Annexure P-2) and 21.08.2008 (Annexure P-4) issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), respectively, in respect of

¶22

Kumar Mohinder 2013.12.05 12:37 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

¶23

[2]

¶24

CWP No.25445 of 2013

¶25

their land measuring 3 kanal 11 marlas comprised a residential house, situated within the revenue estate of village Safidon, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind.

¶26

Since we have already quashed the impugned notifications qua the writ petitioners in CWP No.18678 of 2011 (Shiv Kumar and another versus The State of Haryana and others) and other connected cases for the specific reasons assigned in our order dated 10.07.2012 which is being relied upon by the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition without expressing any views on merits of the petitioners' claim, with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for the release of their acquired property, in accordance with the Government policy and the reasons assigned in the above-cited decision and pass an appropriate order within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

¶27

Till the speaking order is passed by the respondents, both the parties are directed to maintain statusquo regarding possession and further construction.

¶28

Dasti.

¶29

November 20, 2013 Mohinder

¶30

Kumar Mohinder 2013.12.05 12:37 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

Kamlesh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Murli Dhar Joshi etc. Vs UOI etc.

Thockchom Ponil Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Santosh Singhal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Jalandhar Improvement Trust Vs Narsher Singh etc.

Darbara Singh Dhillon & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Kamla Devi and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.