Dismissed

Dalbir Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 May 2013CWP/9528/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a land acquisition notification for highway laning, seeking diversion of the route or construction of a bypass. The Court held that route diversion is a policy matter for the State and the petitioners failed to show malafide or procedural illegality. The writ petition was dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dalbir Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

CWP No. 9528 of 2013

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

CWP No.9528 of 2013 Date of decision: 3.5.2013 Dalbir Singh and others .Petitioners Vs.

¶6

Union of India and others ….Respondents

¶7

CORAM:HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA

¶8

*********

¶9

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the

¶10

judgment?

¶11

Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Present: Mr. J.P.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶15

¶16

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

¶17

The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of certiorari quashing the notification dated 18.6.2010 (Annexure P-7) issued under the National Highways Act, 1956 whereby the land is sought to be acquired for four laning of the Rohtak-Hisar Section of National Highway No.10. Further direction has been sought to the official respondents to give the curve or make bye-pass or make the flyover so that the residential houses of the petitioners can be saved or in the alternative residential land may be allotted to the petitioners along with compensation for construction.

¶18

The pleaded case of the petitioners is that the school and

¶19

CWP No. 9528 of 2013 -2-

¶20

¶21

residential houses of village Mayad, Tehsil and District Hisar adjoining to the National Highway No.10 in which they are residing for the immemorial period of more than hundred years was sought to be acquired. Gazettee notification dated 18.6.2010 was issued for acquiring the land in question but the names of the owners of the houses and other property were not mentioned and, therefore, without giving any opportunity of hearing, notification in question had been issued. The petitioners had been running from pillar to post to save their properties but their representations had been discarded by the National Highway Authority. It was further pleaded that another appropriate land is available in the village and by giving curve in the Highway hundreds of houses would be saved from demolition and that bye-pass and flyover could be built to save the village inhabitants.

¶22

After hearing the counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that the said issue cannot be adjudicated upon and decided under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India as widening of National Highway No.10 is being done for which the notification in question had been issued and acquisition is for the convenience of the public to ensure the smooth flow of traffic through the village. Prayer of the petitioners that highway should be diverted away from the village and may not be constructed through the village or that constructing of alternative bye-pass or flyover is question of policy of the State Government and not for this Court to tread. The petitioners have not been able to show that acquisition was malafide or point out any fault in the acquisition proceedings whereby any relief can be granted to them on the ground of lack of procedure prescribed under the law which had not been followed. For the acquisition, the petitioners are entitled for the

CWP No. 9528 of 2013

-3-

compensation as per the provisions of the Act, and no relief can be granted for the reliefs claimed in this petition.

¶27