Disposed

Rameshwar S/O Mange Ram & Ors. v. F.C.Hy.& Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2014CWP/10095/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In CWP No.10095 of 2013, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a petition challenging land acquisition for an Industrial Model Township. The court accepted the offer of equivalent plots and directed the Corporation to allot them expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the respondent-Corporation to allot equivalent plots of houses and shops to the petitioners expeditiously and to not dispossess them.

Rameshwar S/O Mange Ram & Ors. Vs F.C.Hy.& Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

¶3

CWP No.10095 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.05.2014

¶4

¶5

Rameshwar & Ors. . . . . Petitioners

¶6

VS.

¶7

FC & PS Haryana & Ors. . . . . Respondents

¶8

¶9

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

¶10

¶11

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

¶14

Present: Mr. Deepak Balyan, Advocate for the petitioners

¶15

Ms. Palika Monga, DAG Haryana Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for HSIIDC

¶16

¶17

SURYA KANT, J. (Oral)

¶18

(1) The petitioners, who belong to the poorest strata of society living below the poverty line, impugn the notifications dated 01.04.2010 and 04.04.2011 issued under Sections 4&6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, ‘the Act’), respectively to the extent of acquisition of their land measuring 1K-10M situated within the revenue estate of village Saidpur, Tehsil Kharkhauda, District Sonepat. The acquisition has been made for the development of Industrial Model Township at Kharkhauda. The petitioners’ grievance is that the acquired land includes the residential plots allotted to them by the Gram Panchayat as well.

¶19

(2) Mr. Kamal Sehgal, counsel for HSIIDC refers to the revised lay-out plan of IMT Kharkhauda to point out that the land/houses/structures of the petitioners falls in the alignment of

¶20

Vishal V 2014.07.02 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

��

¶22

�� ��

¶23

proposed 60 mtrs. wide road and 30 mtrs. wide greenbelt adjoining thereto. He submits that since the release of the land/houses of the petitioners would obstruct the construction of a vital public utility, the Corporation has resolved to allot equivalent size of plots comprising built-up houses and shops to the petitioners within the village abadi . The above-mentioned offer being fair, just and equitable, learned counsel for the petitioners has no objection against it and accepts the same.

¶24

(3) In this view of the matter, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondent-Corporation to make allotments in the above-noted terms expeditiously and not to dispossess the petitioners till such allotments are made in their favour.

(4) Dasti .

�� ��

�� 

Vishal V 2014.07.02 11:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Rameshwar S/O Mange Ram & Ors. v. F.C.Hy.& Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar S/O Mange Ram & Ors. v. F.C.Hy.& 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

Sudesh Kumar Arya Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Mange Ram & Anr. Vs State of Haryana &Ors

Tarsem Singh Vs UOI & Ors.

Roshan Lal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Hans Raj and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Satya Narain Gupta Vs State of Haryana and Ors.