Civil Writ Petition No.15470 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.15470 of 2007 Date of Decision: January 07, 2009 Nabbal and others .......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Arun Jain, Senior Advocate with Mr.Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Ashish Kapoor, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr.Kamal Sehgal, Advocate for HSIIDC. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This petition seeks quashing of notification dated 31.7.2006 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and notification dated 9.8.2007 under Section 6 of the said Act. The case of the petitioners is that they belong to Backward Class Community. In the year 1976, under the scheme of “Indira Awas Yojna” the petitioners were allotted 3 Marla plots each on certain conditions to construct their houses. They were also given grant for construction. In Civil Writ Petition No.15470 of 2007 -2- the year 1986, they constructed the houses and they have been living in the said houses since then. The impugned notifications have been issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 without any public purpose and without application of mind to the issue whether the petitioners who were landless could be dispossessed. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the impugned action has been justified, inter alia, on the ground that the land in question was contiguous to the Industrial Model Town and there was public purpose of implementation of projects of Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited for which the land was required. The objections were also filed. The petitioners have not filed any objections under Section 5-A of the Act. In para 6 of the reply, it has been stated that the petitioners are eligible to avail the benefits of a policy for resettlement and rehabilitation of landowners, framed by the State Government, vide notification dated 7.12.2007. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. In view of reply filed on behalf of the respondents, we do not find any ground for holding that the land has been acquired without any public purpose. At the same time, the State having itself accepted that the petitioners are eligible for benefits of human rehabilitation, the State must take steps to rehabilitate the petitioners in accordance with its policy, before their dispossession. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly by upholding the acquisition but with a direction that stay of dispossession granted by this Court on 4.10.2007 will continue till the State rehabilitates the petitioners in Civil Writ Petition No.15470 of 2007 -3- the above manner and till the petitioners are compensated for the structures built by them for which award is said to have been announced. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) January 07, 2009 JUDGE SRM