C.W.P. No. 9815 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 9815 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 20, 2009 Om Parkash .....PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR --- Present: Mr.Deepak Balyan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma,DAG, Haryana, for the respondents. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) In the present case, some land of village Dehkora, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar was acquired for a public purpose, namely, for construction of the drain, vide notification dated 2.5.1978 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The said acquisition was finalized and the award was passed on 21.9.1978. Admittedly in the said acquisition, one of killa number, bearing Rect. No.43 Killa No.16 measuring 2 Kanals 9 Marlas was not notified to be acquired, but actually the said land was taken possession and utilized by the Government for the aforesaid purpose. It is also admitted case that inadvertently another killa number, bearing Rect.No.44 Killa No.16 was shown in acquisition, but possession of the said killa was not taken for the said purpose. It is also conceded position C.W.P. No. 9815 of 2009 -2- that the Government has not paid compensation with regard to Rect. No.43 Killa No.16. However, the compensation with regard to Rect. No.44 Killa No.16 was paid to a third person. It is also conceded position that in the said acquisition, near-about 26 kanals of land of the petitioner was acquired and he was paid the compensation. But after 20 years when the petitioner came to know that Rect. No.43 Killa No.16 measuring 2 Kanal 9 Marlas was utilized for the said purpose, then he approached the respondent-department for releasing the compensation for the said land. When the prayer of the petitioner was not accepted, he filed the instant petition. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3, a categorical stand has been taken that by mistake the aforesaid land of the petitioner was utilized without acquiring it and paying compensation. It has also been stated that wrongly the compensation was paid for the land, which was not utilized, to a third person, against whom, separately the proceedings have been taken for recovering the amount. As far as the petitioner is concerned, it has been stated that the respondents have offered the compensation to the petitioner for the aforesaid 2 Kanals 9 Marlas of land at the same rate on which the compensation was earlier awarded to the petitioner along with solatium @ 30% and interest @ 9% from 2.5.1978 to 1.5.1979 and @ 15% from 1.5.1979 to 20.11.2009, but the petitioner has refused to accept that offer. During the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner conceded that the petitioner will accept the offer made by the respondents. However, counsel states that at least the petitioner should be awarded some costs. This request of the counsel for the petitioner seems to be reasonable. Therefore, we direct the respondents to pay the amount, as calculated by C.W.P. No. 9815 of 2009 -3- them as per Annexure R-II, to the petitioner within a period of one month along with costs of Rs.5,000/-. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE November 20, 2009 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) vkg JUDGE