CWP No.17104 of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 17104 of 2005 Date of decision 12.5.2008 Vinod Kumar and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ... Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Amit Jain Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Palika Monga, AAG Haryana for respondents. M.M.KUMAR, J. This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 17104, 17960 and 15176 of 2005 since in all these petitions common notification acquiring the land of the petitioners has been challenged. A notification dated 9.8.2004 (Annexure P.1) issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act') was issued expressing the intention to acquire the land under challenge. Eventually a declaration dated 20.7.2005 ( Annexure P.4) under Section 6 of the Act was made. Both the notifications have been challenged by the petitioners on the principal ground that the then Finance Minister on 21.12.1981 had recommended the acquisition of the land of the petitioners from acquisition. The contents of the afore-mentioned letter have been reproduced in para 7 of the petition. It is also asserted that the petitioners have not been afforded opportunity of hearing. In the written statement filed by respondents a specific stand has been taken that all steps for acquisition of land provided under the Act have been taken and that the land was required for public purposes. It has CWP No.17104 of 2005 2 further been pointed out that award has already been announced on 29.12.2005. In paras 2 and 7 of the written statement, the respondents have clearly pleaded that the land in dispute was totally vacant at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and whatever construction has been raised it is after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at a considerable length and perusal of the averments made in the written statement, we are of the considered view that these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed. Two similar writ petitions bearing CWP No. 7706 and 7718 of 2008 came up for consideration of this Court which were dismissed on 9.5.2008. Moreover, in the present case, a specific stand has been taken by the respondents that the construction has been raised after issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act which has not been controverted and that some of the petitioners have not even filed objections. Therefore, there is no merit in all these petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed. A copy of this order be placed on the file of connected cases. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Sabina) 12 .5.2008 Judge okg