IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No.10850 of 1988 Date of Decision: March 27,2008 Gopal Krishan Saini and another ...........Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Sabina Present: None for the petitioners Mr.R.S.Rawat, AAG Punjab * * * Sabina, J. Petitioners have filed this petition challenging notification and award dated 19.3.1968 and 3.1.1969 respectively with a further prayer to quash eviction proceedings and notice dated 10.6.1988 and 12.8.1988 respectively. The case of the petitioners as stated in the petition in brief is that the petitioners had residential houses in Ropar town and were owners in possession of land bearing khasra No. 25/1(0K-13M), 17/3(0K-4M) and 17/2(0K-2M). A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') was published on 19.3.1968 and further a notification under Section 6 of the Act was also published simultaneously. Land of the petitioners' bearing khasra No. 33//25/1(0-13) was also the subject matter of the acquisition for construction of new hospital and staff quarters. In pursuance of the said notification, an award was passed on 3.1.1969 by respondent No.3 . A representation was made by the petitioners to the department to release their land. However, the representation bore no CWP No. 10850 of 1988 -2- fruit. The Deputy Commissioner, Ropar and Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Ropar, visited the site and made a recommendation to the Government that the land of the petitioners measuring 13 marlas only had nothing to do with the proposed building plan. In view of this, the civil suit filed by the petitioners was got dismissed as withdrawn on 16.4.1971. The Chief Medical Officer also wrote a letter to respondent No.2 for releasing the land of the petitioners. Petitioners had been in possession of the acquired land. At no stage, land of the petitioners bearing khasra Nos. 33//17/2 was acquired by the respondents, vide notification Annexure P3. However, ownership in the khasra girdwari was erroneously recorded in favour of the respondent-State. Petitioners filed an appeal before respondent No.3 against incorrect entries in the revenue record but the said appeal was dismissed. Thereafter, petitioners filed a revision petition before the Commissioner, Patiala, who ordered that the impugned order shall not be incorporated in the jambandi till the decision of the revision petition. Respondent No.1 filed application for eviction of the petitioners from the land in dispute under the provisions of Public Premises and Lands (Eviction & Rent Recovery) Act, 1973. A notice was issued to the petitioner vide Annexure P14 for eviction. Respondents in their written statement averred that the writ petition suffered from delay and laches. It was further averred that the land acquired in public interest for the construction of building hospital staff quarters etc, adjoined khasra Nos. 33//25/1 and there was open space also adjoining the land in dispute. The land has been acquired for day by day expansion of hospital building, staff quarter etc. Possession of the land CWP No. 10850 of 1988 -3- was taken by the department vide report Nos. 595 dated 2.6.1969. Transfer of possession of land has been confirmed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Ropar. Payment of the award had been deposited with the Collector and the amount of enhanced compensation awarded by the District Judge, Ropar had been deposited in the said Court. Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioners. I have heard the learned counsel for the State and have gone through the record available on the file carefully. In the present case, a declaration under Section 6 (Annexure P3) of the Act was issued on 19.3.1968. Vide the said declaration, the land of the petitioners bearing khasra Nos. 33//25/1 measuring 13 M was sought to be acquired along with other land. In pursuance of notification made under Section 4 of the Act read with Section 17 of the Act, award in terms of the acquisition was passed by the Collector,Ropar on 3.1.1969 (Annexure P4). Land in the present case was acquired for expansion of hospital building, staff quarter etc. As per the written statement, the amount of compensation as per the award was deposited by the Collector, Ropar and enhanced amount of compensation in terms of the decision given by the District Judge, Ropar was also deposited by the Collector in the said Court. Petitioners have, however, filed the writ petition challenging the acquisition proceedings after a long delay. It is well settled that no writ petition would be competent after passing of the award because possession of the land vests in the State Government and the purpose of acquisition might have been accomplished. In this regard, reliance is placed in the cases of Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana, (1996) 11 SCC 698; Municipal CWP No. 10850 of 1988 -4- Council Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2SCC 48; C.Padma v. Dy.Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, (1997) 2SCC 627; and M/s Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008 (2) SC 280. It has been averred in the written statement that the possession of the land had been taken with effect from 2.6.1969 as per report No.595 dated 2.6.1969 of Roznmacha Waquati of Ropar, Patwar Halqa. As such petitioners were in unauthorized occupation of the acquired land which vested in the State Government and the requisite compensation had also been deposited by the Collector,Ropar. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( Sabina ) March 27, 2008 Judge arya