Civil Writ Petition No. 9292 of 2009 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 9292 of 2009 Date of decision: 01.07.2009 Harphool Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** J.S.KHEHAR, J.(Oral) Through the instant writ petition the petitioner has impugned the action of the respondents whereby the land of the petitioner has been acquired by the State Government through an order dated 21.8.2008 vide a notification issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The solitary contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of hearing is that the petitioner has erected construction on the land, and as such, in terms of orders passed in different writ petitions, the acquired land of the petitioner should also be released. We have examined the solitary contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In furtherance of initial notice issued by the respondents under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide notification dated 23.8.2007, it was open to the petitioner to file objections under Section 5 of the said Act. The petitioner factually filed objections on Civil Writ Petition No. 9292 of 2009 -2- **** 14.9.2007. ( A copy of the aforesaid objections are available on the record of this file as Annexure P-3). We have perused the afore-stated objections. It is nowhere asserted at the hands of the petitioner that there was any construction on the land of the petitioner which was sought to be acquired by the respondents. In the aforesaid view of the above, we are satisfied that at the time of issuance of the notification in question, the petitioner had not raised any construction on the land in question. We are, therefore, satisfied that there is no basis for the petitioner to claim release of land acquired through the notification dated 21.8.2008. For the reasons recorded herein above, the petitioner cannot claim release of his land from acquisition proceedings. Dismissed. (J.S.KHEHAR) JUDGE July 01, 2009 (S.D.ANAND) Pka JUDGE