IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 09.09.2010 C.R.No.5791 of 2010 (O&M) Balwanta ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr.M.K.Sood, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral) Challenge in the present revision petition is to an order passed by the Addl. District Judge, Faridabad on 17.07.2010, whereby an application filed by the petitioner to seek impleadment in a reference under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was dismissed. The land of Piyau Bhudwali stands acquired in respect of which, the learned Land Acquisition Collected has announced its Award dated 03.08.2006. The grievance of the petitioner is that such Piyau Bhudwali has entered into settlement with one Budhan son of Kaincha giving substantial rights in the land acquired and by such process, the rights of Piyau Bhudwali are being compromised. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out that how he has interest in Piyau Bhudwali. It is not the case of the petitioner that he is entitled to any compensation on account of acquisition of land owned by Piyau Bhudwali. In the absence of any right in the land acquired, the petitioner cannot claim to be a person interested either in a reference or for apportionment of the compensation. C.R.No.5791 of 2010 (O&M) In view of the said fact, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Faridabad, which may warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. Dismissed. 09.09.2010 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2