Disposed

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

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2014CWP/5756/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging land acquisition for an Industrial Model Township. Finding that the respondent Corporation offered fair alternative plots, the Court directed allotment and restrained dispossession till completion.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent-Corporation to make allotments of equivalent plots expeditiously and not to dispossess petitioners till allotment.

Hans Raj and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

¶3

CWP No.5756 of 2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.05.2014

¶4

¶5

Hans Raj & Ors. . . . . Petitioners

¶6

VS.

¶7

State of 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?

¶12

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

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

¶14

¶15

Present: Mr. ML Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners Ms. Palika Monga, DAG Haryana Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for HSIIDC

¶16

¶17

SURYA KANT, J. (Oral)

¶18

(1) The petitioners 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 5K-13M situated within the revenue estate of village Saidpur, Tehsil Kharkhauda, District Sonipat. The acquisition has been made for the development of Industrial Model Township at Kharkhauda.

¶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 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,

¶20

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

¶21

��

¶22

�� ��

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Roshan Lal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Satya Narain Gupta Vs State of Haryana and Ors.