CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13539 OF 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: June 30, 2010. Parties Name Birinder Singh ...PETITIONER. VERSUS State of Haryana ...RESPONDENT CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih. PRESENT: Mr. V.K.Jain, Senior Advocate, with Mr. S.K.Vij, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Haryana; JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) JUDGMENT Respondent No. 2 issued a notification dated March 8, 1989, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short the Act) proposing to acquire an area measuring 146.44 Acres , situated in Gurgaon Hadbast No. 55, for the development and utilisation of land for residential and commercial area in Sectors 9, 9-A and 10 at Gurgaon. The petitioner filed objections to the proposed acquisition stating that he had raised construction over the land in dispute, the same be not acquired. Similar objections were filed by other right holders. After requisite enquiry by the Collector, an area measuring 134.57 Acres was ordered to be acquired and accordingly a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued vide notification dated March 7, 1990. Hence this writ petition. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13539 OF 1990 -2- It is grievance of the petitioner that despite policy in existence in that regard, construction raised by the petitioner has not been exempted from acquisition whereas benefit of exemption was granted to many other similarly situated right holders. In response to notice issued, reply was filed and in para No. 2 thereof, it was stated as under: “2. That para No. 2 of the Civil Writ Petition is wrong and hence denied. The petitioner is the owner of the land measuring 0B-16B-1B in Khasra No. 884, Land measuring 1B- 2B—0B in Khasra No. 899, measuring 0B-9B-0B in Khasra No. 1136 and measuring 1B-0B-0B in Khasra No. 1137, as per Jamabandi of the year 1986-87. In the said Jamabandi, Khasra No. 884 is shown as Chahi kind of land. Similarly, land bearing Khasra No. 899 is also shown as Chahi kind of land. Land bearing Khasra No. 1136 is shown as Gair Mumkin and the land bearing Khasra No. 1137 is shown as “Gair Mumkin Gaddha”. The allegation of the petitioner that the land is shown as Gair Mumkin Plot is wrong and hence denied. Land bearing Khasra No. 884 and 1136 was completely vacant at the time of notification u/S 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the land bearing Khasra Nos. 899 and 1137 there was construction measuring 75 Sq. yard in each Khasra No. The said covered area alongwith proportionate vacant area measuring 0B-1B-0B in both the Khasra Nos. i.e. 899 & 1137 was left out of acquisition. Therefore, the land which is under acquisition was competely vacant at the time of notification u/S 4 of the Land CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13539 OF 1990 -3- Acquisition Act. The allegation of the petitioner that the petitioner has raised construction in all the four Khasra Nos. besides covering all the four plots by a boundary wall is wrong and hence denied. The petitioner has made the allegations with malafide intentions.” It was further stated that land of other right holders was also excluded on the same principle, which was applied to the petitioner. Faced with the situation, counsel for the petitioner Shri V.K.Jain, Senior Advocate, has failed to find any fault with the acquisition. However, he has vehemently contended that the respondents have virtually abandoned the scheme. Unauthorised colony has come up over the land so acquired and the Government is in the process of regularising the same. In view of that, entire land of the petitioner be also released from acquisition. We are not inclined to accept the contention raised by counsel for the petitioner. There is nothing on record to prove the above said contention. As is apparent from the record, the authorities have already released that portion of the land, over which construction was in existence at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In view of facts, mentioned above, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE June 30, 2010. DKC CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 13539 OF 1990 -4-