State of Haryana Vs Bhagwan Dass and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

State of Haryana Vs Bhagwan Dass and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None to the petitioner-State; the present petition is dismissed and pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the State's revision petition challenging the Executing Court's order dated 29.04.2022, preferred after a period of more than four years, should be entertained by this Court notwithstanding delay and laches.

Court's answer

The revision petition, preferred more than four years after the impugned order dated 29.04.2022 of the learned Executing Court, is hit by delay and laches and calls for no interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction.

Ratio / Principle

The release of benefits of similar market value by the learned Executing Court in favour of co-sharers who failed to file any objections under Section 18 or applications under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 already stands decided/approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide decision dated 13.01.2026 in Ramphal & Ors. Versus Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited & Ors.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Harkesh Manuja, J., oral decision dated 29.05.2026) dismisses Civil Revision No. 4617 of 2026 (O&M) preferred by the State of Haryana through the Land Acquisition Collector, Faridabad, against the order dated 29.04.2022 (Annexure P-5) of the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad-cum-Executing Court, whereby private respondent Nos. 1 to 8 (landowners) were awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 175/- per square yard in terms of the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment dated 10.12.2014 in Civil Appeal No. 11042 of 2014, 'Satbir Singh Versus State of Haryana'. The Court observed that although the impugned order was passed in April 2022, the revision petition was preferred after more than four years, and that the release of benefits of similar market value to co-sharers who had filed neither objections under Section 18 nor applications under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 already stood decided/approved by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide decision dated 13.01.2026 in Civil Appeal No(s).391-398 of 2026 (@SLP (C) No(S).4532-4539 of 2023), 'Ramphal & Ors. Versus Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited & Ors'. Holding the belated challenge to be hit by delay and laches, the Court declined to interfere in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction and dismissed the petition; pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, were also disposed of.

156

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Revision No. 4617 of 2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.05.2026

State of Haryana through Land Acquisition Collector, Faridabad

.......... Petitioner

Versus

Bhagwan Dass and others

.......... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. Abhinav Kalia, DAG, Haryana for the petitioner.

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

By way of present petition, challenge has been laid to an order dated 29.04.2022 (Annexure P-5) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad-cum-Executing Court, whereby the private respondent Nos. 1 to 8-landowners were awarded similar amount of compensation in terms of judgment dated 10.12.2014 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 11042 of 2014 , titled “Satbir Singh Versus State of Haryana” , determining the market value at the rate of Rs. 175/- per square yard in favour of their co-sharers.

[2] I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the records. A perusal thereof shows that the impugned order by the learned Executing Court was passed in April 2022, however, the present revision petition came to be preferred after a period of more than four years. Besides it, the release of benefits of similar market value by the learned Executing Court in favour of co-sharers, who failed to file any objections

DINESH KUMAR 2026.06.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

[2]

CR No. 4617 of 2026 (O&M)

under Section 18 or application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 already stands decided/approved by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide decision dated 13.01.2026 passed in Civil Appeal No(s).391-398 of 2026 (@SLP (C) No(S).4532-4539 of 2023) , titled “Ramphal & Ors. Versus Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited & Ors” .

[3] In such circumstances, at this belated stage after more than four years, challenge to the order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Executing Court, being hit by delay and latches, calls for no interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. Consequently, the present petition is hereby dismissed .

[4] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

May 29, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) 'dk kamra' JUDGE

'dk kamra'

Whether Speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

DINESH KUMAR 2026.06.01 15:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document