IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2442 of 2011 Date of decision: 09.02.2011 Anita Goyal …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Ms.Amita Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) In this writ petition, it is prayer of the petitioner that directions be issued to the respondents not to interfere in his peaceful/ legal possession of the shop situated at 18/4, Mathura Road, Opposite Tomson Press, Faridabad. Prayer made, is in the nature of permanent injunction. For such like matters, the writ petition cannot be entertained. Vaguely, an objection has also been raised against notification (P5), issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) on 2.7.1996, proposing to acquire a vast tract of land, including land allegedly in possession of the petitioner. Copy of the notification, issued under Section 4 of the Act, has not been placed on record. It is also not coming out from the record as to when award was passed. The petitioner took a chance, kept on waiting and this writ petition has been filed at a belated stage. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued in the year 1996. Civil Writ Petition No.2442 of 2011 To overcome the delay, it is contended by counsel for petitioner that the petitioner was under an impression that she was a party in another writ petition filed in the year 1996 and on account of that writ petition was not filed in time. At this belated stage, this writ petition cannot be entertained. More so because relief sought is in the nature of permanent injunction. Nothing has been said in the writ petition regarding ownership of the land. In view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Swaran Lata etc. v. State of Haryana and others AIR 2010 Supreme Court 1664, this writ petition is not maintainable. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 09.02.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) gk Judge 2