IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.7354 of 2010 Date of decision:26.04.2010 Mool Chand ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.N.D.Achint, Advocate for the petitioner. 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.KUMAR, J. There is no explanation for challenging the acquisition proceedings after more than 10 years. A perusal of the paper book shows that notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity` the Act') was issued on 5.5.1997 and thereafter declaration was made on 4.5.1998, which culminated into the award. In absence of any plausible explanation, the writ petition cannot be entertained at such a belated stage. Moreover, CWP No.1051 of 2010 filed by some other person was also dismissed on 21.1.2010, which was directed against the same notification involving the same khasra number. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE 26.04.2010 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) mk JUDGE