Allowed

Aruna Sachdeva v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Dec 2013CWP/27429/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Land Acquisition Collector to pass a supplementary award for trees and excluded land within two months. Failure to comply would entitle the petitioner to special costs of Rs. one lac besides legal compensation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pass supplementary award for trees and include one bigha of land within two months, else pay Rs. one lac special costs.

Aruna Sachdeva Vs State of Haryana and Anr. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.27429 of 2013 Date of Decision : December 13, 2013

Aruna Sachdeva

.......Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana and another .....Respondents

¶7

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

¶8

Present : Ms.Aruna Sachdeva-petitioner-in-person.

¶9

Ms.Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1.

¶10

¶11

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

¶12

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶15

Notice of motion to respondent No.1 only at this

¶16

stage.

¶17

On our asking, Ms.Palika Monga, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1.

¶18

Let a copy 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 non-prosecution.

¶19

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

¶20

The petitioner whose land situated within the revenue estate of village Bhogpur, near Pinjore, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula, has been acquired vide notifications dated 26.09.2007 and 25.09.2008 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the

¶21

Kumar Mohinder 2014.01.08 15:37 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

¶22

[2]

¶23

CWP No.27429 of 2013

¶24

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), respectively, has been subjected to undue harassment by the authorities. The Land Acquisition Collector, passed the Award on the last date of limitation, i.e., 24.09.2010 but no separate award in respect of trees etc. has been passed, for which the petitioner has made several representations to the authorities including the Land Acquisition Collector. The petitioner in the latest representation dated 30.10.2013 (Annexure P-14) has given the details of trees which were standing on the acquired land at the time of acquisition. She is, however, still awaiting for the supplementary award in respect thereto. In addition, it is pointed out by the petitioner that one bigha of land though was acquired but due to noninclusion in the award dated 24.09.2010, no compensation for that land has been paid to her.

¶25

Having heard the petitioner-in-person as also the State counsel, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estates Development, Panchkula, to pass the supplementary award in respect of trees etc., if any, within a period of two months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order, failing which the petitioner shall be entitled to special cost of Rs.one lac besides compensation in accordance with law. The Land Acquisition Collector is further directed to include the afore-stated land of one bigha in the supplementary Award to be passed.

¶26

Dasti.

¶27

December 13, 2013 Mohinder

¶28

Kumar Mohinder 2014.01.08 15:37 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

Aruna Sachdeva v. State of Haryana and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aruna Sachdeva v. State of Haryana and Anr.

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

Dalbir Singh Vs Punjab Mandi Baord and Ors.

Dariya Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mahender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Narinder Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Rupali Mahajan Vs Pgimer, Sector 12, Chandigarh and Ors.