IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.12369 of 2007 Date of decision: 6.1.2009 Dalip Singh and others. -----Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and another. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present:- Mr. J.S. Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Palika Monga, AAG, Haryana for respondents. ----- ORDER: 1. This petition seeks quashing of notification dated 5.6.2007, Annexure P-11, under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”) and notification dated 6.6.2007, Annexure P-12, under Section 6 of the Act, acquiring land of the petitioners measuring 0.10 Biswas in Khasra No.1007 Min. 2. Case of the petitioners is that earlier notification dated 24.8.2000 was issued under Section 4 of the Act and notification dated 22.8.2001 was issued under Section 6 of the Act. However, the said land of the petitioners was left out while making the award. Further notifications dated 12.12.2005 under Section 4 of the Act and C.W.P. No.12369 of 2007 19.12.2005 under Section 6 of the Act were issued. The petitioners filed C.W.P. No.2733 of 2006, wherein a direction was given that the land which falls within dividing road and sewer line be taken in acquisition and matter be reconsidered for the remaining. Thereafter, the impugned notifications dated 5.6.2007 and 6.6.2007 have been issued. The petitioners submitted a representation which was accepted on 18.7.2008 vide Annexure P-15, to the extent of 1452 square yards of land, which was beyond the Sector dividing road and Service road. 3. In the reply filed by the Land Acquisition Collector dated 16.9.2008, in para 3, it is stated that the land of the petitioner is being acquired for public utility on the basis of demarcation by District Town Planner, Gurgaon. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per site plan Annexure P-10, land in Khasra No.1007 is not covered by the road or by the sewer and therefore, acquisition thereof was not called for. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that the State has acted on the basis of demarcation report of the District Town Planner to the effect that the land in dispute was required for public utility. 6. We are of the view that the question raised in the petition is a disputed question of fact and there is no reason to reject the stand of the State that the land was required for public utility. Mere fact that the Khasra number in question is not covered by the area shown in the road, cannot be conclusive of the requirement by the State for a public purpose. The matter has been examined by the Financial Commissioner and vide order Annexure P-15, the land which was found 2 C.W.P. No.12369 of 2007 not required for road etc. has been released to the extent of 1452 square yards. 7. In view of above, no ground is made out for interference with the impugned notifications. 8. The petition is dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE January 06, 2009 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) ashwani JUDGE 3