Disposed

Hukam Chand and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2017CWP/11068/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of eight writ petitions. The Court directs the Deputy Commissioner to consider a legal notice and sanction mutation in favour of petitioners within 45 days, provided no other acquisition proceedings exist.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.2 to consider legal notice dated 01.06.2016 and sanction mutation in favour of petitioners within 45 days.

Hukam Chand and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CWP No.11068 of 2017

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.11068 of 2017 Date of decision:22.05.2017

¶5

Hukam Chand and others	... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and others	... Respondents
	CWP No.11115 of 2017
Harkishore and others	... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and others	... Respondents
	CWP No.11101 of 2017
Yashpal and others	... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and others	... Respondents
	CWP No.11098 of 2017
Jai Singh and others	... Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and others	... Respondents

¶6

Savita 2017.05.26 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶7

{2}

¶8

CWP No.11068 of 2017

¶9

CWP No.11095 of 2017 Parmod Arora ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CWP No.11069 of 2017 Shri Ram and others ... Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CWP No.11257 of 2017 Ram Kishan and others ... Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CWP No.11134 of 2017 Kamlesh Arora ... Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others ... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶11

Present:Mr. Vikrant Hooda, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral)

¶13

Savita 2017.05.26 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶14

CWP No.11068 of 2017

¶15

{3}

¶16

This order of mine shall dispose of 8 writ petitions bearing Nos.11068, 11115, 11101, 11098, 11095, 11069, 11257 and 11134 of 2017.

¶17

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that State of Haryana promulgated notification dated 17.04.2002 showing the intention of acquiring the land of the petitioners along with other people for the purpose of residential, commercial and institutional for Sector 1 (Part) 10-11 (Part) 12 and 13 Bahadurgarh in the revenue estate of village Bahadurgarh, Hadbast No.38, Balore, Hadbast No.64, Sarari Aurangabad, Hadbast No.44 and village Barkatabad, Hadbast No.63, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar (Annexure P-1.).

¶18

The petitioners filed the objections under Section 5 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “1894 Act”) but the Government authorities without considering the same issued the notification under Section 6 of 1894 Act, vide Haryana Government Gazette 10.04.2003, for acquiring the land of the petitioners (Annexure P-2). However, the aforementioned notifications were challenged in this Court, vide various writ petitions and this Court, vide order dated 21.04.2014 quashed the notifications. The Government preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which vide order dated 11.05.2016 (Annexure P-5) has also been dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioners have been seeking indulgence of the authorities for correction of the mutation.

¶19

He further submits that owing to the provisions of Section 16 of 1894 Act, the entry in the revenue record with regard to symbolic

¶20

Savita 2017.05.26 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶21

CWP No.11068 of 2017 {4}

¶22

possession has been recorded in favour of the State but the physical possession is with the petitioners. The petitioners have been approaching the respondents for sanctioning of the mutation in their name but no reply has been received so far despite submission of legal notice to the Deputy Commissioner.

¶23

He further submits that he will be satisfied if direction is issued to respondent No.2 for taking appropriate action on the legal notice dated 01.06.2016 (Annexure P-6) within a stipulated period.

¶24

Without going into the merits and demerits of the matter, I direct respondent No.2 to consider the legal notice dated 01.06.2016 (Annexure P-6) served upon him by the petitioners and sanction mutation in favour of the petitioners if there is no other acquisition proceedings against them and thereafter pass a speaking order thereon in accordance with law. Though prima facie notifications under Sections 4 and 6 have already been set aside and the matter had attained finality upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶25

Let the aforementioned exercise be done within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶26

The writ petitions are disposed of with the above direction.

¶27

(AMIT RAWAL) May 22, 2017 JUDGE savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶28

Savita 2017.05.26 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Hukam Chand and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hukam Chand 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

Sube Singh etc. Vs Dharam Chand etc.

Dulia @ Duli Chand Vs Financial Commissioner and Others

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

Ram Chander Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Biaso Devi and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Satinderbir Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.