Punjab-Haryana High Court
Seema Devi And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 22 April, 2013
Author: Ajay Kumar Mittal
Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal, G.S. Sandhawalia
CWP No.7912 of 2013 (O & M) ::1::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.7912 of 2013 (O & M)
Date of Decision: April 22, 2013
Seema Devi and others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr.Arun Bansal, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
****
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced Annexures P-16 to P-21 i.e. representations and photographs. Same are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Notifications under Section 4 dated 20th April, 1990 and under Section 6 dated 18th April, 1991 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') respectively and award dated 23rd March, 1993 in respect of land measuring 4 Kanals falling in Khatoni No.38, Khasra No.11/1/1 (1-0) and Khatoni No.37, Khasra No.15/3 (3-0). A prayer has also been made for directing the respondents to release the residential house of the petitioners alongwith the land beneath it from the acquisition.
CWP No.7912 of 2013 (O & M) ::2::
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are in possession of 4 Kanals of land and have raised construction as is discernible from Annexure P-21. According to the learned counsel, the perusal of Annexures P-7, P-13 and P-14 would show that the respondents have been releasing the acquired land wherever there is construction. Learned counsel referred to Annexure P-8 and submitted that the respondents had recommended for release of 518.24 Square Yards of land belonging to petitioners No.2, 3 and 4 (Page 41 of the paper book). On the aforesaid premises, it was urged that the land of the petitioners also deserves to be released.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on a query put by the Court, submitted that such a detailed and comprehensive representation taking all the aforesaid pleas has not been filed with the respondents. He, however, prayed that he may be allowed to withdraw the present petition with liberty to the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation to the respondents giving the facts as has been raised in the present petition. He further stated that the respondents be directed to decide the same expeditiously.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of at this stage by permitting the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation with respondent No.2 for the claim as has been sought to be raised in the writ petition. However, if such a CWP No.7912 of 2013 (O & M) ::3::
representation is made, the same shall be decided by respondent No.2 within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order by passing a speaking order thereon in accordance with law.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE April 22, 2013 sukhpreet