IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: September 22, 2011 1. CWP No. 15516 of 1991 Vijay Kumar and others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents 2. CWP No. 16488 of 1991 Ram Naresh Agarwal …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others …Respondents 3. CWP No. 16780 of 1991 Chhaila Ram and others …Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another …Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON’BLE HON’BLE HON’BLE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. C.B. Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). 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. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. This order shall dispose of three petitions, namely, CWP Nos. 15516, 16488 and 16780 of 1991. The common prayer made in all the petitions is for quashing notifications dated 23.1.1990 and 18.1.1991, initiating proceedings for acquisition of land under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) respectively. CWP Nos. 15516, 16780 & 164488 of 1991 2 2. When the matter came up for consideration on the last date of hearing, we have noticed that huge area of land as depicted in various paras of the petitions stand already released. After the release of the aforesaid area, as mentioned in the writ petitions, some other area which was subject matter of consideration in numerous writ petitions, including CWP No. 7255 of 1991 had also been released. Those petitions were disposed of on 14.9.2011. However, in these three petitions the question remain to be decided was as to what is the position of the land/houses belonging to the petitioner(s) vis-a-vis the one which have already been released by the respondents. Accordingly, we asked the learned State counsel to produce a copy of Aksh-Shizra with proper marking of the released land. 3. At the resumed hearing, Mr. Kamal Sehgal, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, has produced before us a copy of the Aksh-Shizra showing that there was a thickly populated block of land, which has been depicted with the Mark of ‘ABCD’ and the land of the petitioner(s) fall within this block. According to the learned counsel, a letter dated 22.9.2011 has also been received from the Land Acquisition Officer, Urban Estates, Haryana, Gurgaon, which clearly states that the land belonging to the petitioner(s) is covered by the block ‘ABCD’, depicted in the Aksh-Shizra. It has, in fact, been clarified by the earlier letter, dated 12.5.1992, that the Government had decided to release the land in question. A copy of the letter dated 22.9.2011, copy of the Aksh-Shizra and copy of the letter dated 12.5.1992 are taken on record as Mark ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’. 4. In view of the above, nothing survive for determination in these petitions. The land of the petitioner(s) has already been released. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. CWP Nos. 15516, 16780 & 164488 of 1991 3 5. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases. (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) (M.M. KUMAR) Acting Chief Justice Acting Chief Justice Acting Chief Justice Acting Chief Justice (GURD GURD GURD GURDEV SINGH EV SINGH EV SINGH EV SINGH) September September September September 22 22 22 22, 2010 , 2010 , 2010 , 2010 Judge Judge Judge Judge PKapoor