CWP No.652 of 2011 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 652 of 2011 Date of Decision : 27.7.2011 Balvir Kaur .......... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...... Respondents **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present : Mr. Satbir Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Haryana. Mr. Gurvinder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Siddharth Batra, Advocate for respondents No. 2 & 4. **** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL) The petitioner's land measuring 3 Kanals and 8 Marlas was under acquisition. This writ petition was filed with a prayer to quash the notifications dated 15.1.2008 and 14.1.2009 issued under Sections 4 & 6 respectively, of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Vide the notifications mentioned above, a vast track of land including the land of the petitioner was put under acquisition. When notice of motion was issued on 14.1.2011, following contentions of the counsel for the petitioner were noted by CWP No.652 of 2011 -2- this Court. “By making reference to the photographs and also to the revenue documents on record, counsel for the petitioner states that the construction raised by the petitioner was in existence when notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued. He further submits that as per Policy of the State Government dated 26.10.2007, constructed buildings cannot be put under acquisition. Despite that, relief was declined to the petitioner, whereas the said relief was granted to many other land owners.” At that time an attempt was made to show that a constructed house of the petitioner is going to be acquired. Upon notice, reply has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 & 6. Para No.5 of the preliminary submissions of the reply filed by the respondents No. 1 & 6 reads thus:- “5. That the petitioner and other interested persons, who filed objections u/s-5A of the Act within prescribed period of limitation, were properly heard. After giving full opportunity of hearing, the then Land Acquisition Collector made a report on individual objections and sent the report with recommendations to the Government for final decision. Almost all the constructed areas have been left from the acquisition except those existed in the green belt area or the Sector roads. As per report u/s-5A of the Act, there CWP No.652 of 2011 -3- was a house measuring 433 square yards in land in dispute of the petitioner at the time of notification u/s-4 of the Act. After taking the decision, the Government ordered for the declaration u/s-6 of the Act for rest of the land. The declaration u/s-6 of the Act made vide No. LAC(H)-NTLA/2009/465 on 14.01.2009 accordingly.” In the written statement, it is specifically stated that after taking note of the objections filed under Section 5-A of the Act, land measuring 433 square yards under construction along with proportionate vacant area was kept out of acquisition. The land which was not under construction has been ordered to be acquired because it falls within the green belt area and the Sector roads. If that is so, at this stage we feel no interference is required to be made at the instance of the petitioner. Dismissed. (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE 27.7.2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) 'sp' JUDGE