IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.22276 of 2010 Date of decision: 15.12.2010 Narain Singh and others …..Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Pawan Kumar, Senior Advocate with Mr.Saqib Ali Khan, Advocate for the petitioners Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to a notification dated 2.6.2009, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act), to acquire a vast track of land, falling in five villages (including 177.69 acres land in village Nangli Umarpur). Further challenge has been made to a declaration issued on 2.6.2010 under Section 6 of the Act. It has vehemently been contended by counsel for the petitioners that despite Policy in existence, land on which, residential house of the petitioners exists, has been ordered to be acquired, whereas in the case of many other land owners, their residential houses were kept out of acquisition. We have gone through the paper book and perused the photographs. It is not in dispute that so far as the petitioners are concerned, after hearing their objections, filed under Section 5-A of the Act, about one kanal nine marla of land was released from acquisition on account of existence of building thereon. Perusal of photographs indicates that the CWP No.22276 of 2010 building may be in existence, in less than in the area, released from acquisition. The vacant land has been ordered to be acquired, to which, possibly, the petitioners cannot raise any objection. It is further contention of counsel for the petitioners that licences have been granted to many builders after issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. As per Policy of the State Government, it is permissible if application to get a licence, was moved before issuance of that notification. There is no averment that the application was not filed before issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 15.12.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2