CWP No. 8981 of 2010 and another connected case 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 19.08.2010 CWP No. 8981 of 2010 Ram Mohan Roy and others ….. PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Haryana and another ….. RESPONDENTS CWP No. 8982 of 2010 Ram Mohan Roy and others ….. PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Haryana and another ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Amit Rawal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. R.D.Sharma, DAG, Haryana. *** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL) By this order, we propose to dispose of CWP No. 8981 of 2010 titled as Ram Mohan Roy and others vs. State of Haryana and another and CWP No. 8982 of 2010 titled as Ram Mohan Roy and others vs. State of Haryana and another. For convenience, facts are being taken from CWP No. 8981 of 2010. CWP No. 8981 of 2010 and another connected case 2 In these writ petitions, it is prayed by the petitioners that directions be issued to the respondents to decide application filed by them under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). As per the facts on record, after passing of the Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, some of the right holders filed applications under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of compensation. The Land Acquisition Tribunal, vide judgment dated 10.12.2008, increased the compensation. Thereafter, the petitioners moved an application under Section 28-A of the Act for claiming the same relief, which was granted to the others in the above-said case. When their application was not decided, they came to this Court. In reply to the notice issued, counsel for the respondents, on instructions from Manglesh Sharma, ADA, states that the appeals filed by the State against Award passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, mentioned above, are pending in this Court. In paragraph No. 1 of the reply, it has been stated as under:- “ That the present writ petition is not maintainable in the present form and has no locus-standi in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled “State of Maharashtra vs. Nanakchand Pyrammal & Ors.” 1996 (Suppl.) LACC 151 S.C. Held that “Section 28-A (1)-Redetermination of compensation-Award given by the District Judge challenged in the High Court case pending-Reference application under Section 28A to be kept pending till the High Court decides the case.” CWP No. 8981 of 2010 and another connected case 3 We feel that in view of ratio of the judgment mentioned in the above-said paragraph and also the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ran Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2009) 1 Supreme Court Cases 754, it is not possible for us to issue any directions at this stage. However, as and when the appeals filed by the State are decided, immediately thereafter, the Collector shall pass an appropriate order on the pending application filed by the petitioners under Section 28A of the Act. These writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE August 19, 2010 pj CWP No. 8981 of 2010 and another connected case 4