1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 15541 of 2009 Date of decision 6 .4.2010 Varinder Kumar ... Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and others ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Ravinder Jain ,Advocate for the petitioner 1.To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2.Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing notification dated 28.8.2001 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act') and declaration dated 30.8.2001 issued under Section 6 read with Section 17 of the Act (P.2). He has also prayed for quashing of award dated 23.7.2002. The basis of the prayer made in the petition is that according to the information supplied to the petitioner only a part of the acquired land was used for construction of road and the land belonging to the petitioner has not been used for construction of road as is evident from the information supplied under the Right to Information Act on 27.11.2007. We have heard the learned counsel at a considerable length and are of the view that this is a frivolous piece of litigation. Acquired land including the land belonging to the petitioner vested in the State free from all encumbrances on 27.3.2002 when the award was announced and 2 possession of the land was taken. Even if part of the land remained unutilised for the declared public purpose it would not confer any right on the petitioner to seek either quashing of the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act or request for reverting the land back to the petitioner. Such a course is not permissible in law and no relief can be claimed on that basis. The writ petition is wholly ill advised and the same is dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Jitendra Chauhan) 6.4.2010 Judge okg