CWP No. 3043 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 3043 of 2010 Date of decision: 16.07.2010 M/s Heera Fashions and another ….. PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Haryana and others ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Shailendra Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana, for respondents No. 1and 2. Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. *** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL) When notice of motion was issued, following contentions of counsel for the petitioners were noted by this Court on 05.04.2010:- “Mr.Jain, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioners has drawn our attention to the site plan (P-10), wherein it is depicted that newly added respondent, namely, M/s Lamba Industries had filed CWP No.17461 of 2004, whereas petitioner-M/s Heera Fashions had preferred CWP No. 3043 of 2010 2 CWP No.1337 of 2004. The land belonging to M/s Lamba Industries is demarcated by green line, while the land belonging to petitioner-M/s Heera Fashions is demarcated by black line which is shown as `ABCD'. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by making a reference to the decision taken by the Ministers' Committee. According to the learned counsel, there was an order releasing the land of both the petitioners from acquisition with the stipulation that they will have to leave the area occupied by road as per the site plan (P-10). The aforesaid site plan was considered by the Ministers' Committee. The site plan would show that huge portion of the land belonging to M/s Lamba Industries was occupied by the road and the position was the same as far as the Heera Fashions was concerned. Learned counsel has pointed out by referring to another site plan (P-16) showing that the road has wrongly been shifted from the land belonging to M/s Lamba Industries in contravention of the understanding between M/s Lamba Industries and the HSIIDC and part of the road has been shifted to the land of the petitioners, which is marked by yellow colour as 10.20. The land of the M/s Lamba Industries has been made free from any division and small portion of the road is to go through the land of the M/s Lamba Industries, which is absolutely arbitrary.” CWP No. 3043 of 2010 3 It is primary grievance of the petitioners that after release of their land, one road, which actually was to pass through the land of the M/s Lamba Industries, has wrongly been shifted to in their land. In reply filed by the State through T.L. Satyaprakash, Joint Secretary to Government of Haryana, Industries and Commerce Department, Chandigarh, it has been stated in the preliminary submissions in para 14 as under:- “14. That the HSIIDC has informed that land measuring 907.05 Sq. Yards comprising in khasra No. 68//11/1 min situated in village Dundahera, District Gurgaon is falling in ROW of the road to be transferred free of cost to the Government as per decision conveyed vide letter dated 22.09.2006. In addition to above, 847 Sq. Yards (1 Kanal 8 Marlas) land comprising in khasra No. 68//11/1 min of the petitioner firm, is required for the ROW of the other road. It has been proposed by the HSIIDC that this land is to be exchanged with the Corporation land measuring 1119 Sq. Yards (1 kanal 17 marlas) comprising in khasra No. 67/15 min and 68//11/2 min. M/s Heera Fashion would have to pay for the additional area i.e. 272 Sq. Yards. A copy of Layout plan is annexed as Annexure R-3.” Counsel for HSIIDC has also consented with above averment. In the written statement, the proposal, regarding facts mentioned in para 14 above, has also shown in the site plan (Anexure R- 3). Reading of the contents of para 14 makes it very clear that out of the CWP No. 3043 of 2010 4 land released in favour of the petitioners, the authorities will require an area measuring 1 Kanal 8 Marlas and in lieu thereof, as shown in the site plan, adjoining area measuring 1 Kanal 17 Marlas will be given to the petitioners. For the additional area of 272 Sq. Yards, the petitioners shall make payment to the respondents as per the current allotment rate. We feel that the proposal made by the respondents is perfectly justified and no plausible explanation has been given to oppose the same. The respondents shall be bound by the statement made by them in the preliminary submissions in para 14 of the written statement and allot additional land to the petitioners at the current allotment rates. The measurements at the spot to complete area released and now to be allotted to the petitioners shall be done at the spot. With above-said order, this writ petition stands disposed of. In view of the order passed in the main case, C.M. No. 9185 of 2010 has become infructuous, therefore, there is no need to pass any order in the C.M. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE July 16, 2010 pj