CWP No.9897 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 9897 of 2009 Date of decision: 8.7.2009 Lal Singh ....Petitioner. vs. State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.D.ANAND --- Present: Mr.Ajit Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner. -- J.S.KHEHAR,J. (Oral) The pleadings in the instant writ petition reveal, that the land of the petitioner measuring 21 kanal 5 marla was acquired by the respondents through a notification dated 15.7.1971. Through the aforesaid notification, land was allegedly sought to be acquired for the purpose of development of Sector 15-A, Faridabad. Consequent upon the determination of compensation at the hands of the Land Acquisition Collector the possession of the land of the petitioner was taken, and the petitioner was paid the determined amount. It is not a matter of dispute, that the petitioner did not initiate proceedings under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for claiming enhanced compensation. Others similarly situated, as the petitioner, whose land was also acquired through the aforesaid notification dated 15.7.1971 availed of the aforesaid remedy for enhancement of compensation. The pleadings in the instant writ petition reveal, that the CWP No.9897 of 2009 2 Collector enhanced the compensation of landowners whose land was sought to be acquired through the notification dated 15.7.1971. So as to claim compensation the petitioner initiated proceedings under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This claim of the petitioner, was declined by an order dated 16.9.2003 ( Annexure P3). A perusal of the aforesaid order reveals, that the Collector declined to entertain the claim of the petitioner on account of the fact, that the aforesaid claim was made beyond the period stipulated in section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.The instant order passed by the Collector dated 16.9.2003, is not subject matter of challenge through the instant writ petition. Consequent upon the passing of the order dated 16.9.2003 by the Collector, the petitioner moved an application under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that despite the fact the aforesaid application was filed in the year 2003, no decision has been taken thereon till date. The solitary prayer made in the instant writ petition, is for a direction to the Collector to take a final decision in the matter. Having considered the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner in the background of the facts narrated hereinabove, we are satisfied, that it would not be possible for us to pass such an order keeping in view the mandate contained in section 28-A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The aforesaid provision is being extracted hereunder for facility of ready reference:- “28A. Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court.- CWP No.9897 of 2009 3 (1)xx xx xx. (2) xx xx xx (3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub- section (2) may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court and the provisions of sections 18 to 28 shall, so far as may be, apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under section 18.” A perusal of sub-section (3) of section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, reveals that the aforesaid sub-section can be invoked only when an award has been passed by the Collector . Insofar as the present controversy is concerned, it is apparent from the order dated 16.9.2003, that no award was passed by the Collector under the aforesaid provision. As such, the petitioner has no right to invoke the liberty vested in an individual enumerated in sub-section (3) of section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. ( J.S.Khehar) Judge (S.D.Anand) Judge July 8, 2009 rk