IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.19086 of 2008 Date of decision: 29.1.2009 Rajinder Pal and another. -----Petitioners Vs. State of Haryana and another. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present:- Mr. Mukul Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ----- ORDER: 1. This petition seeks quashing of proceedings for acquisition initiated vide notification dated 23.2.1989 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”). Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 22.2.1990. Thereafter, award was made in the year 1992. This petition has been filed on 6.11.2008 on the ground that CWP No.5070 of 2007 was filed by sister concern of the petitioner being M/s Mahalakshmi Spinners Limited and another v. State of Haryana and another, which was allowed on 4.5.2007 vide Annexure P-8, on the ground that the District Town Planner had recommended for C.W.P. No.19086 of 2008 release and there was no reason not to accept the said recommendation. 2. In the reply, objection has been raised that the petition was barred by laches. The award having been made in the year 1992, petition filed in the year 2008 could not be entertained in view of decisions relied upon in the reply. It is also submitted that land having vested in the State long back, the matter of validity of acquisition could not be gone into at this stage. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the State relies upon judgment of this Court dated 2.12.2008 in CWP No.687 of 2008 Smt. Asha Malik and another v. State of Haryana and others and dated 17.12.2008 in CWP No.17613 of 2007 Shiv Shakti Spinning Mills and another v. State of Haryana and others related to the same acquisition. In the said judgments, after considering the very same point i.e. parity with the order of this Court dated 4.5.2007 in M/s Mahalakshmi Spinners Limited (supra), it was held that after the announcement of the award, land having vested in the State, the question of release could not arise. 5. The present petition is, thus, fully covered against the petitioners by order of this Court in Smt. Asha Malik and Shiv Shakti Spinning Mills (supra), relied upon on behalf of the State. 6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE 2 C.W.P. No.19086 of 2008 January 29, 2009 ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN ) ashwani JUDGE 3