IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.3278 of 2009 Date of decision: 3.3.2009 Shekhar Gupta & another. -----Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present:- Mr. Chander Shekhar, Advocate for petitioners. ----- ORDER: This petition seeks quashing of notification dated 8.10.2003 under Section 4 and notification dated 7.5.2004 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), in pursuance of which, land of the petitioners has been acquired for extension of tourist complex, Surajkund. Award was announced on 8.5.2006. Mutation was entered in the name of the State. In view of invocation of urgency clause, possession had been taken even before the announcement of the award. Contentions raised in the petition are that notice of acquisition was not served on the petitioners and the award was not announced within two years, as required under Section 11-A of the Act and that big chunk of land belonging to different persons was released. C.W.P. No.3278 of 2009 We do not find any substance in the contentions raised. The petition has been filed more than two years after making of the award and taking of possession. The petitioners have made a representation on 27.2.2008, Annexure P-6, which shows that by that date, the petitioners were fully conversant about the developments. No prejudice is shown to have been caused. The award is not shown to be beyond two years of last publication of the notification under Section 6 of the Act. The award recited that it was pronounced on 5.5.2006. As regards alleged illegal release of land, neither the persons in whose favour release has been ordered have been impleaded as parties nor there is any prayer for quashing of release. We, thus, do not find any merit in the petition. Dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE March 03, 2009 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) ashwani JUDGE 2