Remanded

Murti Devi v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Sept 2014CWP/18183/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a notice of motion concerning land acquisition for residential sectors at Dadri, relying on principles from a prior order in Kuldeep Singh, the court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's claim and maintain the status quo temporarily.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider the claim in light of the Kuldeep Singh order within four months; parties directed to maintain status quo.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.18183of2014(O&M)
 DATE OF DECISION: 04.09.2014

¶3

Murti Devi

¶4

…..Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Haryana and others

¶7

 .....Respondents

¶8

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICEASHUTOSH MOHUNTA,ACTINGCHIEFJUSTICE

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU

¶10

Present: Mr. Ajay Vijarania, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):

¶12

Notice of motion.

¶13

On our asking, Ms. Shalini Attri, Deputy Advocate

¶14

General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the

¶15

respondents.

¶16

Let three copies of the writ petition be supplied
to the learned State Counsel during the course of day failing
which this order shall automatically stand recalled and the
writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-
prosecution.

¶17

In view of the nature of order which we propose to
pass, there is no necessity to seek any counter-reply from
the respondents at this stage.

¶18

PARKASH CHAND 2014.09.04 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

CWP-18183-2014

¶20

- 2 -

¶21

The petitioner impugns the notifications dated

¶22

18.12.2008 (Annexure P-1) and 17.12.2009 (Annexure P-2)

¶23

issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, respectively, to the extent of acquisition of her land
and residential house for the public purpose of development
of residential Sectors 9 Part & 10 Part, at Dadri, District
Bhiwani.

¶24

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for
the parties are ad-idem that similar controversy has been

¶25

elaborately dealt with by this Court vide order dated
20.08.2013 passed in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP
No.23386 of 2011 (Kuldeep Singh versus State of Haryana and

¶26

another).

¶27

We thus dispose of this writ petition with
a direction to the respondents that let the claim of
the petitioner be also considered in the light of above-cited
order in Kuldeep Singh's case(supra).

¶28

Let an appropriate order in this regard be passed
within a period of four months from the date of receiving a
certified copy of this order.

¶29

Till then, both the parties are directed to

¶30

maintain status-quo. Dasti.

¶31

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA ) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶32

PARKASH CHAND 2014.09.04 17:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Murti Devi v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murti Devi 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

Harpal Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Nachhattar Singh & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Balam Khan Vs State of Haryana etc.

Gurpreet Singh @ Teetu Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Dera Tapwala Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Shiv Singh & Ors. Vs U. O. I. & Ors.