IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.456 of 2011 Date of decision: 01.02.2011 Bal Chand Goyal …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg Present: Mr.M.L.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash a notification, issued on 15.1.2008 (P4) under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act), proposing to acquire a vast tract of land falling in several villages, including land measuring 272.89 acres falling in village Vaidwala, for a public purpose, namely, for the development of residential sectors 21 and 22 Part shown in the plan prepared under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. Further challenge has been made to a declaration, issued on 14.1.2009 (P7) under Section 6 of the Act, declaring an intention of the authorities to acquire land measuring 262.13 acres in village Vaidwala alongwith huge chunk of land falling in other villages. Still further, challenge has been made to a notification issued under Section 9 of the Act on 14.12.2010 (P11). Civil Writ Petition No.456 of 2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, during pendency of this writ petition, award was passed on 13.1.2011. To get his land released from acquisition, it is stated by the petitioner that he had raised construction in the property, under acquisition, before issuance of a notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is further stated that as per Policy of the State Government dated 26.10.2007, built up area cannot be acquired if the construction had been raised before issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. To show the construction, reference was made to the photographs (P6) on record. Perusal thereof indicates that construction is new one and is very scanty. Besides raising the boundary wall, a small tin roof room has been constructed on its one corner. There is no evidence on record to prove that the construction was raised before 15.1.2008. No case of discrimination with the petitioner is also made out as per record. No other land owner in whose favour land may have been released has been arrayed as a party in this writ petition and under what circumstances, land was released in favour of any land owner is not on record, only a vague statement has been made in that regard. It is evident on record that land falling in khasra No.56//9/2/2 to the extent of 3 kanal was left out of acquisition. This fact has not been mentioned in the writ petition. No case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 01.02.2011 (Rakesh Kumar Garg) gk Judge 2