Disposed

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Aug 2014CWP/12411/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this curative order, the High Court dismissed the impugned notifications and award but directed the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation on an alternative site for the proposed Water Sewerage Treatment Plant within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No.1 to decide the representation regarding the alternative site within two months from receipt of this order.

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

¶1

CWP No. 12411 of 2014(O&M) -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CWP No. 12411 of 2014(O&M) Date of decision:August 19,2014

Manjit Singh

..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab & ors. .... Respondents

¶8

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶9

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU

¶10

Present: Mr. Dhiraj Chawla,Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE(ORAL)

¶12

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the notifications dated 10.06.2011 (Annexure P-2) and 08.12.2011 (Annexure P-3) issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as also the award dated 02.11.2012 (Annexure P-4) in respect of acquisition of land measuring 14 kanal 5 marlas situated in the revenue estate of village Kazikot, Tehsil and District Tarn-Taran. The land in question was acquired for 'construction of disposal work/Water Sewerage Treatment

¶13

Plant'.

¶14

DINESH KUMAR 2014.08.21 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh

¶15

CWP No. 12411 of 2014(O&M) -2-

¶16

The petitioner herein alongwith others had earlier filed Civil Writ Petition No. 24503 of 2013 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2013 with the direction that the petitioners therein may pursue their case before the authorities by pointing out alternative suitable site, if any available.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner herein alongwith others has filed representation dated 23.12.2013 (Annexure P-13) clearly suggesting alternative site for the setting up of Water Sewarage Treatment Plant but the same has not been decided by the authorities concerned so far.

¶18

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we dispose of this writ petition with direction to respondent No.1 to decide the representation (Annexure P-13), expeditiously and preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶19

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶20

( HARINDER SINGH SIDHU ) JUDGE

¶21

19.08.2014 dinesh

¶22

DINESH KUMAR 2014.08.21 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court,Chandigarh

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sanjay Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Others

Jai Singh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Rajinder Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Rameshwar Dass Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Ishwar Singh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.