REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 225 of 2011(O&M) in -1- CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11105 OF 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: August 19 , 2011. Parties Name Parle Biscuits Pvt. Limited ...PETITIONER VERSUS State of Haryana and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg PRESENT: Mr. P.K.Mutneja, Advocate, for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (oral) Order. CM No. 7753 of 2011: This application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 56 days in filing the review application. In view of reasons given in the application, it is allowed and delay in filing the review application is condoned. R.A. No. 225 of 2011 (O&M) This application has been filed with a prayer to review an order dated February 24, 2011, vide which after placing reliance upon an affidavit filed by Shri T.L.Satyaprakash in a connected writ petition, i.e., CWP No. 5006 of 2003, the writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous. In that affidavit, it was specifically stated that the land falling REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 225 of 2011(O&M) in -2- CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11105 OF 2002 in Khasra Nos. 30//11(4-19), 17(8-0), 31//15(7-12), 16/1(6-7), 16/2(1-5) and 25(7-4) was notified for acquisition, whereas adjoining piece of land, owned by the petitioner, measuring 12.07 Acres was kept out of acquisition. It is further stated that thereafter land comprised in Khasra No. 13//11 and 17, in which water treatment plant and pavement used for truck parking were in existence, was released from acquisition. If that is so, no relief can be given to the petitioner on the basis of affidavit now filed. It is borne out from the record that the petitioner by filing this writ petition had laid challenge to the acquisition of above land, measuring 4.43 Acres. It was specifically stated in the writ petition that the treatment plant was in existence in the land falling in Khasra No. 30//17. On July 22, 2002, when notice of motion was issued, following order was passed: “Mr. P.K.Mutneja, Advocate. Notice of motion for 18.11.2002 insofar as challenge to acquisition pertaining to land comprised in Khasra No. 30/17 measuring 8 kanals only, as shown in the site plan, Annexure P- 2, is concerned. It may be mentioned here that as per statement made by the counsel, treatment plant is located in Khasra No. 30/17. Stay dispossession insofar as Khasra No. 30/17 is concerned.” Thereafter, on January 13, 2004, again following order was passed by this Court: “During the course of arguments, Mr. Vijay Dahiya, learned REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 225 of 2011(O&M) in -3- CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11105 OF 2002 Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, seeks time to have instructions whether the area pertaining to Khasra No. 30/17 where there is the Effluent Treatment Plant can be left out from the array of acquisition.. List again on 13.2.2004.” The orders passed clearly demonstrate that qua rest of the land, notice of motion was not issued. The process was initiated by this Court only with regard to land falling in Khasra No. 30//17 on the ground that a water treatment plant was in existence in that Khasra number. Once it has come on record that the said land was released lateron by the authorities, we feel that no further relief can be granted to the petitioner. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge August 19, 2011 DKC