CWP No.10236 of 2009 :1: In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. CWP No.10236 of 2009 Date of Decision: 26.10.2009 Hemant Luthra ....Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr.Justice J.S. Khehar Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mehinder Singh Sullar Present: Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Palika Monga, D.A.G., Haryana for respondent No.1, 2, 4 and 5. Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for respondent No.3. ... J.S. Khehar, J. (Oral). The land of the petitioner was sought to be acquired through notification dated 2.6.2009. It is not a matter of dispute, that the petitioner filed objections under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 1894 Act), on 9.7.2009. There can be no doubt, whatsoever, that the objections filed by the petitioner on 9.7.2009, were within the period of limitation. The petitioner filed further objections styled as supplementary objections on 10.7.2009. It is the case of the petitioner, that the objections CWP No.10236 of 2009 :2: originally filed had been submitted by one of his neighbour on account of the fact, that the petitioner was busy with the treatment of his daughter, who was suffering from pneumonia. It is also pointed out, that the petitioner’s daughter under reference was admitted in a hospital in Bombay. The mandate of Section 5A of the 1894 Act, requires the respondents to afford an opportunity of hearing to all affected parties. As such, there can be no doubt, whatsoever, that the petitioner has a right to present his objections during the course of the aforesaid opportunity, which is liable to be afforded by the respondents to him. It is not the case of the respondents, that they shall not afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The only case of the respondents is, that valid objections could have been filed by 9.7.2009, and since supplementary objections have been filed by the petitioner on 10/13.7.2009, they cannot entertain the supplementary objections. We have considered the totality of the circumstances of the instant controversy from the facts narrated hereinabove. The fact that the petitioner has filed objections in time (on 9.7.2009) is not disputed. The fact that the petitioner is to be afforded an opportunity of hearing so as to enable him to press his objections, as also, to consider any other document that he may desire to place, is also not disputed. The only dispute pertains to the entertaining of the supplementary objections filed by the petitioner a day later i.e. on 10.7.2009. Since the original objections were filed within the time prescribed, we are satisfied that the objection raised by the respondents, is too trivial, so as to deny the petitioner, who is a land owner and whose land is subject matter of acquisition, the right to press further grounds. This CWP No.10236 of 2009 :3: conclusion of ours is also based on the fact, that the respondents have yet not afforded an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner under Section 5A of the 1894 Act, nor have they issued any notification/declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act. Confronted with the aforesaid situation, learned counsel for the respondents have invited this Court’s attention to a judgement rendered by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court in Sharp Tools and others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, AIR 2007, Madras 37, wherein while recording its conclusion in paragraph 12, it has been held that objections to the acquisition are to be submitted by the interested person whose land has been acquired, within 30 days from the date of publication of the notification. Since the last date for filing objections had already expired when the supplementary objections dated 10.7.2009 were submitted by the petitioner, it is submitted that he cannot be permitted to file the same, specially in view of the legal position depicted by the Full Bench of the Madras High Court in the Sharp Tools’ case (supra). Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, keeping in mind the fact, that the petitioner has undisputedly filed objections within the time stipulated under Section 5A of the 1894 Act, as also, the fact that he is entitled to an opportunity of hearing wherein it is open to him to raise all such pleas as are available to him, so as to explain his position for the release of his land which is subject matter of acquisition, we direct the respondents to take into consideration all such objections that are raised by the petitioner during the course of hearing. The respondents shall also permit the petitioner to place all such material as he so desires for CWP No.10236 of 2009 :4: their consideration during the course of such hearing. Disposed of accordingly. ( J.S. Khehar ) Judge ( Mehinder Singh Sullar ) Judge 26.10.2009 sk.