CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4999 OF 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: December 14 , 2010. Parties Name Ex-Subedar Surat Singh ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS The State of Haryana and another ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih PRESENT: Mr. C.B.Goel, Sr. Adv., with Mr. R.C.Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) JUDGMENT This judgment will dispose of two writ petitions, i.e., CWP No. 4999 and 5000, both of the year 1990. For facility of reference, to dictate order, facts are being taken from CWP No. 4999 of 1990. This writ petition has been filed to assail a notification dated March 8, 1989,(P-2) issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894,(in short the Act) to acquire 457.50 Acres of land, for a public purpose, namely, development and utilisation of the land for residential and commercial area in Sectors 9, 9-A and 10 at Gurgaon. Further challenge has been laid to the declaration (P-3) issued under Section 6 of the Act on CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4999 OF 1990 -2- March 7, 1990, declaring intention of the respondents to acquire land measuring 439.25 Acres. Petitioners came to this Court by alleging that they have their residential houses in the land under acquisition, qua many other land owners, their construction was left out of acquisition after hearing objections under Section 5-A of the Act, whereas such relief was not granted to the petitioners without any justification. Upon notice, reply was filed. Para No. 2 of the reply reads thus: “That the petitioners have not come to the Hon'ble Court with clean hands at all. In para No. 5 of the Civil Writ Petition, all the petitioners have claimed construction over the land in dispute. The claim of the petitioners is totally false and has been made with malafide intentions. Fact is that at the time of notification u/S 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, there was construction of petitioner No. 1, Ex-Subedar Surat Singh only in Khasra No. 555 village Basai, Tehsil and Distt. Gurgaon having a covered area of 151 Sq. yards. The said construction was a residential construction and was left out of acquisition along with proportionate vacant area measuring 151 Sq. yards. Thus in all, an area measuring 302 Sq. yards (0B-2B-0B) was left out of acquisition of the said petitioner. Besides the said petitioner, petitioner No. 12 S. Kishan Chand had raised one shop in Khasra No. 554/14 with malafide intention. The same was acquired. There was no construction of any other petitioner at all. A survey was conducted by the answering CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4999 OF 1990 -3- respondent fully in accordance with law. The relevant record shall be produced before the Hon'ble Court as and when the same is ordered by the Hon'ble Court. The Civil Writ Petition filed by the petitioners is liable to be dismissed on this ground also.” There is no replication on record to the averments made in the written-statement. It is also stated in the written-statement that no objection under Section 5-A of the Act was filed by the petitioners at Sr. No. 2,4,6,7,10,11,13 to 16, 19, 21 to 28, 31 to 37, 39, 41, 45, 48, 49, 52, 56, 57, 59, 60 to 65, 67, 69, 70, 71 to 75, 78, 80, 83, 84 and 86 to 88. It is further stated that except the petitioners No. 1 and 12, there was no construction in the land owned by any of the petitioners, which was ordered to be acquired. Attention of the Court was also drawn to the orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court on February 18, 1991, dismissing challenge to the acquisition where land was lying vacant. It is apparent from the record that the declaration to acquire land was issued after proper verification and construction raised by many right holders was ordered to be released. No case of discrimination against the petitioners is made out. Dismissed. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE December 14 , 2010. DKC