IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 3174 of 2006 Date of Decision: July 8, 2008 Ram Karan 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. Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Addl. AG, Haryana, for the respondents. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioners have prayed for quashing notification dated 27.11.2003 (P-1), issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) and declaration dated 24.11.2004 (P-3), issued under Section 6 of the Act. The petitioners have claimed that they are owner in possession of land comprised in Khewat No. 323, Khatoni No. 371, Khasra No. 42/4 (1-15-0), measuring 200 Sq. Yards, situated in the revenue estate of Village Islampur, Tehsil and District Gurgaon. It has been further claimed that the petitioners have electricity domestic connections installed by C.W.P. No. 3174 of 2006 the DHBVN Limited, Gurgaon. Still further it has been claimed that the petitioners have constructed a big residential house on the land in question, which consists of 8 rooms, verandah, latrine, bathroom, kitcen, cattle-shed, boundary wall with iron gate. They have a big family consisting of 8 family members who are residing in this house and also having Ration Card No. 960787. 2. When the matter came up for consideration on 2.3.2006, dispossession of the petitioners was stayed by a Division Bench in terms of the order passed in a similar writ petition bearing CWP No. 8224 of 2005. 3. During the pendency of the petition, the claim made by the petitioners for release of land has been considered by the State Government. To that effect, an affidavit of the Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon, has been filed alongwith Annexure R-1 disclosing that the prayer made by the petitioners for releasing the land from acquisition could not have been acceded to, inasmuch as, the land belonging to the petitioners falls in green belt and service road. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the paper book, we are of the considered view that there is no possibility of releasing the land from acquisition as the land belonging to the petitioners fall in green belt and service road. Accordingly, there is no merit in the instant petition and the same is dismissed. However, since it has come on record that the construction was raised by the petitioners much prior to issuance of 2 C.W.P. No. 3174 of 2006 notification under Section 4 of the Act, it is directed that the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners for rehabilitation in accordance with the policy of the State and law. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (SABINA) July 8, 2008 JUDGE Pkapoor 3