IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 5677 of 2010 Date of Decision: March 30, 2010 Sunesh Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Sanjay Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing notification dated 10.7.2007, issued under Section Sections 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) and declaration dated 21.1.2008, made under Section 6 of the Act (P-1 and P-2 respectively). A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to release the land of the petitioner measuring 1 Kanal 12 Marlas, comprised in Khasra No. 61/3/2/1, Hadbast No. 38, situated in village Patti Jattan, Ambala City. The Government has acquired the land for a public purpose, namely, for the construction of New Fruit and Vegetable Market, Ambala City. It is an admitted position that award in the acquisition proceedings in question has already been passed on 11.3.2008 before filing of the instant petition, which has been filed on 25.3.2010. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner we find that no ground is made out to accept the contention raised by the petitioner and to quash the acquisition proceedings subject matter of instant petition. Award in the present case has already been announced on 11.3.2008 before filing of the instant petition. It is well settled that no writ petition would be competent after passing of award because possession of land, free from all encumbrances was taken and it is deemed to vest in the State Government. In that regard reliance may be placed on the judgments of Hon’ble the Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Industrial Development and Investment Company (P) Limited, (1996) 11 SCC 501; Municipal Council, Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2 SCC 48; C. Padma v. Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, (1997) 2 SCC 627; Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana, (1996) 11 SCC 698; and M/s Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008 (2) SC 280. In view of above, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) March 30, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor