Petitioners challenged land acquisition earlier quashed. Petition directs authorities to restore ownership and possession if no SLP was filed and judgment is final.
Direction to respondent authorities to ascertain facts and restore ownership and possession of the land within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.20354 of 2016. Date of Decision: September 29, 2016
Ram Pal and others
......Petitioners
versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA.
*******
Present: Mr.Chirag Wadhwa, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms.Palika Monga, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.
-.-
Surya Kant, J . (Oral)
Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1 & 3 only at this stage.
On our asking, Ms.Palika Monga, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf.
Let two copies of the writ petition be supplied to learned State counsel during the course of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non-prosecution.
In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, it is not necessary to seek any counter-reply from respondent Nos.1 & 3 or to serve respondent No.2 at this stage.
The grievance of the petitioners is that their land measuring 17 kanal 1 marla described in para No.2 of the writ petition was acquired under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (since repealed), followed by an Award dated 27.03.2002. The acquisition was challenged in this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No.5495 of 2002 (Satish Chand and others versus State of Haryana and others) and dispossession was stayed.
The above-stated writ petition was allowed by this Court vide Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.10.19 17:01I attest to the accuracy andorder dated 23.05.2014 (P-3). It is averred that no SLP was filed and the integrity of this document Chandigarh
CWP No.20354 of 2016
[2]
said judgment has attained finality.
The grievance of the petitioners is that despite the fact that acquisition stands quashed, the land has not been restored in their favour, for which they represented the Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar vide representation dated 07.03.2016 (P-4).
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the factual issues raised by the petitioners, namely, that the abovestated judgment has attained finality, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent-authorities to ascertain the correct facts and if no SLP has been filed and the judgment has attained finality, let the necessary entries be made in the revenue record/official record restoring the ownership and possession of the petitioners. The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.
| Dasti. | |
|---|---|
| [SURYA KANT] JUDGE |
|
| September 29, 2016 mohinder |
[SUDIP AHLUWALIA] JUDGE |
| Whether speaking/reasoned | : Yes/No |
| Whether Reportable | : Yes/No |
Mohinder Kumar Kamboj 2016.10.19 17:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the acquisition challenged in an earlier writ petition was quashed and final.
Whether the land acquired under the said acquisition proceedings be restored to the petitioners in the absence of possession.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ram Pal and others
State of Haryana and others
Surya Kant
Sudip Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
