Disposed

Sardara Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2014CWP/10040/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the writ petition seeking quashing of land acquisition notifications and award. It granted a temporary status-quo pending the decision by the Competent Authority, relying on a previous related decision. No detailed reasoning is provided.

What did the court decide?

The parties were directed to maintain the status-quo pending the Competent Authority's decision.

Sardara Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.10040 of 2014 Date of Decision : May 22, 2014

Sardara Singh

.....Petitioner

versus

State of Haryana and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL.

¶9

Present : Mr.C.B.Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Palika Monga, Deputy AG, Haryana.

¶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

¶15

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶16

Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 at this

¶17

stage.

¶18

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

¶19

Let three 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, there is no need to seek counter-reply from respondent Nos.1, 3 & 4 or to serve respondent No.2 at this stage.

¶21

The petitioner though seeks quashing of the notifications dated 9.08.2002 (Annexure P-2) and 08.08.2003 (Annexure P-4) issued under Sections 4 & 6, respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

¶22

Kumar Mohinder 2014.07.09 12:06 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

¶23

[2]

¶24

CWP No.10040 of 2014

¶25

Act') and the Award dated 05.08.2005 (Annexure P-11) in respect of his land, the actual relief sought by him pertains to the release of his residential house, situated in Tagore Garden Colony, Kaisth Patti, Ambala Road, Kaithal, from the subject acquisition carried out for the development of Sector 21, Kaithal by Haryana Urban Development Authority.

¶26

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

¶27

An identical issue came up for consideration before us in CWP No.16214 of 2013 (Chandi Ram and another versus State of Haryana and others which also pertained to the same acquisition. That writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 29.07.2013 with certain directions.

¶28

The instant writ petition is also thus disposed of in the same terms.

¶29

The parties shall maintain status-quo till the decision is taken by the Competent Authority,

¶30

Dasti.

¶31

May 22, 2014 [LISA GILL] Mohinder JUDGE

¶32

Kumar Mohinder 2014.07.09 12:06 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh

Sardara Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sardara Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pyare Lal Vs Haryana State

Mam Raj Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Balwan Singh Lohan Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Subhash Chander & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Bhajan Singh & Sons Vs Chandigarh Administration and Ors.

Punjab State High Court Lawyers Coop. Hb Soc. Lt. Vs Greater Mohali Area Development Author. & Ors.