IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1631 of 2011 Date of decision: 15.02.2011 Ram Kuwar …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr.Ravinder Malik, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This writ petition has been filed to quash a notification, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) on 4.1.2002, proposing to acquire a vast tract of land, including 300 square yard of land owned by the petitioner. Further challenge has been made to a declaration, issued under Section 6 of the Act on 31.12.2002, declaring an intention of the respondents to acquire the land in question. Still further, award passed on 29.12.2004 is under challenge. This writ petition could have been dismissed, having been filed at a belated stage, however, taking note of the averments of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a very poor person and he has raised construction in the property, in dispute, we orally asked the counsel for the State of Haryana to consider whether construction of the petitioner can be adjusted in the over-all planning for which the land was acquired. In Civil Writ Petition No.1631 of 2011 response thereto, Mr.Aashish Kapoor, Addl.A.G. Haryana has put on record a letter dated 14.2.2011 written by the Director General, Urban Estates, Haryana addressed to the office of Advocate General, Haryana. Relevant contents of the letter read thus:- “In the above CWP you have intimated the following direction:- The matter was examined and comments of Chief Administrator, HUDA were sought which are as under:- (1) The site of applicant affects one block of EWS dwelling units proposed to be constructed and the parking area provided for these EWS dwelling units. It will also interfere with the open space (interse distance) kept between the adjoining block. Therefore, from planning point of view this office does not recommend release of land of petitioner. (2) Since in this case the award stands announced on 29.12.2004, acquisition process stands completed, planning done and implementation of approved plan already started at site for construction of EWS dwelling units, it may not be possible to release the land at this stage. In view of above facts and recommendation of HUDA, the land of the petitioner can not be considered for release. The Hon’ble Court may kindly be apprised accordingly.” 2 Civil Writ Petition No.1631 of 2011 In this letter, it is clearly mentioned that the construction raised by the petitioner cannot be adjusted, as it will affect the land earmarked for construction of dwelling units for economically weaker section and also parking area. The petitioner continued to wait and allowed the grass to grow under his feet by not challenging the acquisition of his land at an appropriate time. Award was passed in the year 2004. Nothing was done thereafter and this writ petition has been filed after about seven years of passing of the award. In view of ratio of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Swaran Lata etc. v. State of Haryana and others AIR 2010 Supreme Court 1664, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 15.02.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) gk Judge 3