CWP No. 1954 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 1954 of 2010 Date of decision: 19.07.2010 Sanjay Kumar son of Madan Lal ….. PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana and others ….. RESPONDENTS CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH Present: Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gagandeep Singh Wasu, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for respondents No. 1 and 2.' Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. *** Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to a notification dated 31.03.2008 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short' the Act') proposing to acquire a vast track of land including land of the petitioner falling in Rect. No. 36, Khasra CWP No. 1954 of 2010 2 No. 9, Killa No. 3/2 (0-8), 9 (7-0), 2 6(1-5). Further challenge has been made to the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act on 27.03.2009. It is an admitted fact that during pendency of this writ petition, the Award qua the acquired land was also passed by the Collector. It is also an admitted fact that the land of the petitioner was vacant at the spot, when notification to acquire it was issued. It is primary grievance of the petitioner that adjoining land has been left out from acquisition whereas similar treatment has not been given to him. We have perused the site plan. The land of the petitioner falls on the main road and the released area, on one side of the land of the petitioner is a part of Government School and others are plots allotted by the Panchayat for abadi. So far as the area situated on opposite side of the petitioner is concerned, for that change of land use certificate was issued before issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In the written statement filed by the respondents, it was stated as under:- “ That as per the report of the District Revenue Officer- cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Mewat, the petitioner filed objection under Section 5-A of the Act for release of his land parcels comprising in khasra Nos. 36//3/2 (0-8), 9 (7-0) and 26 (1-5) situated in village Rojaka Meo, Tehsil Nuh District Mewat, stating that his land was in close proximity of Abadi of Village Rojaka Meo and as per the policy of the State, the laldora of the every village had to be extended with a view to accommodate the increasing population of the village. The District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Nuh CWP No. 1954 of 2010 3 at Mewat considered the objection and reported that a school, Graveyard and plots under twenty point programme are situated adjacent to it and recommended that the land be exempted if not interfering in the proposed plan. The HSIIDC did not agree with the recommendation of District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Nuh at Mewat and recommended to acquire the same, as the land was lying vacant. The team of officers under the chairmanship of the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Industries and Commerce Department, visited the subject land of the petitioner and agreed with the report of the HSIIDC. The State Government, after considering the recommendations of the District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Mewat, the comments of the HSIIDC and recommendations of the team that visited the site of the objections, decided to acquire subject land of the petitioner situated in village Rojak Meo Tehsil Nuh District Mewat, as the same is essentially required for the integrated project.” In para-9 of the written statement, it has also been mentioned that as per the Rehabilitation Policy issued by the State of Haryana on 07.12.2007, the petitioner shall be entitled to get a plot in the developed area for his rehabilitation. We are not inclined to interfere in this writ petition. In view of the facts mentioned above, the same is dismissed. CWP No. 1954 of 2010 4 However, it is directed that the respondents shall allot a plot to the petitioner as per the Policy, mentioned above as per his entitlement within a period of six months'. ( JASBIR SINGH ) JUDGE ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE July 19, 2010 pj