Disposed

M/S Mittal Woollen and Cotton Mills v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Sept 2014CWP/19383/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the non-physical possession of acquired land, arguing lapse under the 2013 Act. The Court directed the State to decide the pending representation within three months, pass a speaking order on possession status, and refrain from demolishing existing factory buildings pending the decision.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State to decide the pending representation within three months, passing a speaking order on possession status, and not demolish existing factory buildings.

M/S Mittal Woollen and Cotton Mills Vs State of… — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.19383of2014(O&M)
 DATE OF DECISION: 17.09.2014

¶3

M/s Mittal Woollen and Cotton Mills

¶4

…..Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

The State of Haryana and another

¶7

 .....Respondents

¶8

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

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU

¶10

Present: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner

¶11

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):

¶12

The averments made in this writ petition are that
the land of the petitioner was acquired vide notifications
dated 23.02.1989 (Annexure P1) and 22.02.1990 (Annexure P2)
issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, respectively, and the Award was announced on
21.02.1992.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶14

till date physical possession of the acquired land has not
been taken by the respondents. Therefore, in view of
provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013, the acquisition has lapsed. Learned
counsel further submits that the petitioner has submitted a

¶15

PARKASH CHAND 2014.09.17 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶16

CWP-19383-2014

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

representation dated 10.05.2014 (Annexure P-5) for release
for its land, but no decision has been taken thereon.

¶19

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶20

we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to
respondent No.1 to decide the representation dated 10.05.2014
(Annexure P-5) filed by the petitioner in accordance with
law by passing a speaking order. The question whether the
possession of the property of the petitioner has been taken
or not should also be clearly stated while deciding the
representation. In case, factory building of the petitioner
exists on the said land in question as on date then the same
shall not be demolished till the decision of the above
representation. The decision in this regard be taken within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this order.

¶21

 (ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
 ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
17.09.2014 (HARINDER SINGH SIDHU)
parkash*JUDGE

¶22

PARKASH CHAND 2014.09.17 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

M/S Mittal Woollen and Cotton Mills v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Mittal Woollen and Cotton Mills v. State of Haryana and Another

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

Bachu Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Vijay Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sunder Lal Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Rajeshwar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Gulzar Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Ankit Textiles Vs State of Haryana and Another