IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No.4824 of 2008 Date of Decision: May 23,2008 Prabhati ...........Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.M.Kumar Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: Mr.S.K.Yadav,Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Palika Monga,AAG Haryana * * * M.M. Kumar, J. This order shall dispose of the civil writ petitions No. 4824, 4827,4933 of 2008. The acquisition proceedings under challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution were initiated on issuance of notification dated 14.12.2006 issued under Section 4 and declaration made on 18.1.2008 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short `the Act'). At the hearing, learned State counsel has pointed out from the copy of the order dated 14.5.2008 stating that the declaration dated 18.1.2008 issued under Section 6 of the Act has lapsed because it was issued after a period of more than one year from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act. She has further stated that already a bunch of petitions including CWP No.4249 of 2008 has been disposed on the statement made by learned Advocate General which relate to same acquisition. Therefore, the writ petition to that extent deserves to CWP No. 4824 of 2008 -2- succeed. The learned State counsel further states that a fresh notification under Section 4 of the Act has been issued which can be challenged in accordance with law on all available grounds. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in addition to challenge to acquisition, the petitioner has also claimed other reliefs. In view of the above, these petitions have been rendered infructuous because the State has accepted the claim that the notification under Section 6 has lapsed having been issued after a period of one year. Wherever any other relief has been claimed by the petitioner, it shall not cause any prejudice to them if they file another petition challenging the fresh notification issued under Section 4 of the Act. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of each connected case. ( M.M.Kumar ) Judge ( Sabina ) Judge May 23, 2008 arya