IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.10221 of 2011 Date of decision: 05.08.2011 Rashid and others …..Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Ashok Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.S.S.Patter, Sr.DAG Haryana Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) In this writ petition, it is grievance of the petitioners that their land was put to a public use, without any proper acquisition, more than three decades ago. Thereafter, despite many efforts made, the authorities have failed to pay compensation to them. The notifications were issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the Act). Those were allowed to lapse and no award was passed. On 3.6.2011, following order was passed by this Court:- “On the last date of hearing, we passed the following order:- “Learned State counsel is directed to get information as to whether land owned by the petitioners had been used for some public purpose or if used, why the compensation has not been paid.” Civil Writ Petition No.10221 of 2011 In response thereto, on getting instructions from Mr.Ram Lal, XEN, Mewat Water Service Division, Nuh, District Mewat, it has been stated by the State counsel that in fact without acquisition, the land stood utilized for a public purpose. She further submits that the State is ready to make payment of compensation. Notice of motion for 5.8.2011. We expect that the authorities shall issue notifications under Sections 4 and 6 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within fifteen days from today and thereafter, an award shall be passed, failing which, Mr.K.K.Jalan, Secretary, Department of Irrigation, State of Haryana shall come present in Court on the next date of hearing. A copy of the order be given to the State counsel under signatures of Court Secretary.” Mr.Patter has put on record an affidavit of Mr.Ram Lal, Executive Engineer, Mewat W/Services Division, Nuh, district Mewat, wherein it is stated that as per the directions issued, award has been passed by the competent officer on 22.7.2011 and amount of compensation assessed, has been deposited by the respondents with the Land Acquisition Collector. Counsel for the petitioners states that the amount assessed is on the lower side. Be that as it may, the petitioners may approach the competent authority/ Court for redressal of their grievance, as per law. The Land Acquisition Collector is directed to disburse the compensation amount to the petitioners, as per their entitlement, within a period of 15 days. 2 Civil Writ Petition No.10221 of 2011 It is a case, where lethargic attitude of the government officials is writ large. The land was taken in possession more than three decades ago and it was used for construction of a drain. The land was taken in possession forcibly without any authority. Thereafter, on request made by the land owners, a notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 25.11.1998, followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 4.3.1999. Notifications were allowed to lapse. Award was not passed. When the matter was agitated by the land owners, again a notification was issued under Section 4 of the Act on 22.8.2003, followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 2.4.2004. Again nothing was done. Notifications were allowed to lapse. Above facts clearly indicate that the government officials do not care for a common man. All the functionaries of the Stage got powers from the Constitution, which starts with the words “We the people of India, the Constitution reflects the will of the people of the country. Government officers are supposed to be very sensitive to the miseries of a common man. However, the present case demonstrates that the government officers have shown attitude of an autocrat king who does not bother about his subject. Under similar circumstances, noting a fact that action of the authorities was illegal, a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.4242 of 2002, titled as M/s Eros City Developers Private Ltd. Versus Union of India and others, decided on 25.11.2010, has observed as under:- “At this stage, we will refer to the following portion of the preface to 1964 paper book edition of the book titled “The Modern State” by Maciver:- "The state has no finality, but human nature is as stable as human needs, and what human beings need 3 Civil Writ Petition No.10221 of 2011 from government - if we think not of the few, but of men generally, men as social beings - is the same under all conditions. These are liberties secured by restraints, justice under law, order that provides opportunity, the economy of the good life. The modes of satisfying these needs change with the changing conditions. To satisfy any need whatever, even the most spiritual, a modicum of power is necessary, for power is simply the effective control of means. From the beginning of human history government has been recognized as the overall holder and regulator of power, maintaining order by limiting all other expressions of power and thereby turning permitted powers into rights. In that concept lay the rudiments of the principles of government. In every age men have sought to clarify the application of these principles to the changing times. In every age the abuse of power by governments has led to disasters and uprisings, oppressions and vainglorious wars, and sometimes to experiments in the control of power, seeking to make it responsible, or more responsible, subject in some manner to the will of the people, of the majority or those who represented them." No compassion has been shown so far as rights of the land owners are concerned. The authorities have acted in a very arbitrary manner not in consonance with the spirit of the Constitution of India. 4 Civil Writ Petition No.10221 of 2011 In view of above, we impose costs of Rs.three lac upon the respondents, to be paid equally to all the petitioners (Rs.10,000/- each). The District Collector is directed to pay the amount of costs through individual demand drafts within a period of two months from today. If any other amount remains to be paid to the petitioners that shall also be paid. Thereafter, he shall conduct an enquiry to pin-point as to which officer/official was responsible in not taking action in time and thereafter the amount be recovered from the concerned officer(s). The writ petition stands disposed of. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 05.08.2011 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 5