IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No. 20019 of 2009 Date of Decision: May 12, 2010 Rewati Raman and others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Addl. AG, Haryana, for the respondents. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges notification dated 26.9.2007 (P-1), issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) and declaration dated 25.9.2008 (P-3), made under Section 6 of the Act. It is conceded position that the issue raised in the instant petition has already been answered by us against the petitioners vide our judgment dated 6.4.2010 rendered in the cases of Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 6155 of 2010) and Buli and others v. State of Haryana and others (CWP No. 6205 of 2010) wherein same notifications dated 26.9.2007 (P-1) and 25.9.2008 (P-3) were subject matter of challenge. Even the factual position is not different in the instant petition. Accordingly, following the same reasoning, we dismiss the instant petition in terms of our judgment dated 6.4.2010 rendered in the aforementioned cases. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) May 12, 2010 JUDGE Pkapoor