IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17130 of 2010 Date of decision: 22.9.2010 Meena Singla …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Deepak Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this writ petition, challenge has been laid to a notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act) on 26.9.2007(P5), proposing to acquire a vast track of land, including land of the petitioner. Further challenge is to the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act on 25.9.2008 (P6). It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that constructed residential house of the petitioner has been ordered to be acquired, whereas houses of other land owners were released from acquisition. We have seen the photographs (P3) put on record, which clearly show that only a very small construction along with boundary wall is in existence in the land of the petitioner. The construction appears to be a recent one. Otherwise also, admittedly, the petitioner has not filed any objection under Section 5-A of the Act. In view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana, (1996) 11 SCC 698; Municipal Council Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2 SCC 48; C. Padma v. Dy. Secretary to the Government of Civil Writ Petition No.17130 of 2010 Tamil Nadu, (1997) 2 SCC 627; and M/s Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008 (2) SC 280, once land owner has failed to file any objection under Section 5-A of the Act, possibly, the writ petition at his instance, cannot be entertained. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 22.09.2010 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2