IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13369 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision: 01.08.2011 Smt.Sunita and others …..Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Hari Om Attri, Advocate for the petitioners Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This order will dispose of nine writ petitions bearing Nos.13230, 13231, 13232, 13233, 13234, 13235, 13236, 13369 and 13371 all of 2011, involving similar question of law and facts. For facility of reference, facts are being mentioned from CWP No.13369 of 2011. This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the notifications, issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) on 12.12.2008 and 11.12.2009 respectively, proposing to acquire a vast tract of land for a public purpose, namely, ‘for development and utilization of land for Institutional Sector 5-A, Dharuhera’. Land, qua which dispute has been raised in this writ petition is also part of those notifications. It is stated by the petitioners that in the land, in dispute, they have raised their houses and contrary to the Government Policy dated Civil Writ Petition No.13369 of 2011(O&M) 26.10.2007, their built up houses have been ordered to be acquired. However, at the time of arguments, it transpired that only a vacant piece of land, situated on one side of the Colony, is under acquisition. The above said fact is not disclosed in the writ petition. Taking note of the same, following order was passed by this Court on 28.7.2011:- “Perusal of the paper book indicates that the relief has been sought by demonstrating that the land under construction is going to be acquired, whereas to the contrary, during arguments it transpires that only a vacant piece of land is under acquisition and houses have already been kept out of the same In the paper book above fact has been concealed. It appears that an attempt has been made to mislead the Court by mis-stating the facts. Other similar cases are fixed on 1.8.2011. Adjourned to 1.8.2011.” Now, by filing an affidavit in all the writ petitions, it has been stated that non-disclosure of a fact that only the vacant piece of land is going to be acquired, was only on account of an inadvertence. There was no mala fide on the part of the petitioners. We feel that a very lame excuse has been extended to overcome the concealment of material fact. Faced with the situation, counsel for the petitioners wishes to withdraw these writ petitions with liberty to approach the Collector, as per law, to claim compensation in the land, in dispute. All the writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn as per prayer made. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 01.08.2011 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2 Civil Writ Petition No.13369 of 2011(O&M) 3