In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 3386 of 2007 Date of decision: 27.5.2008 Kurukshetra Educational and Welfare Trust, Kurukshetra ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.A.S.Virk, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Ashish Kapoor, Addl.A.G.Haryana. Mr.R.S.Longia, Advocate for Mr.Arun Walia, Advocate for HUDA. **** JUDGMENT M.M.KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court by challenging acquisition proceedings initiated by notification dated 11.11.2003 (Annexure P-1) issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for brevity 'the Act'); declaration made on 10.11.2004 (Annexure P-3) under Section 6 of the Act and award dated 8.11.2006 (Annexure P-8). 2. When the matter came up for consideration on 14.3.2008, the learned State counsel made a reference to the policy of the State Government dated 26.10.2007, which provided that in CWP No. 3386 of 2007 -2- cases where interim order of stay has been granted by the Court then the owner of the land became entitled for consideration of his case by the Director, Urban Estate, Haryana. On the basis of statement made by the learned State counsel we have issued directions for consideration of the case of the petitioner in terms of policy dated 26.10.2007. 3. In response to the aforementioned directions, the Director, Urban Estate, (Haryana) vide its report dated 20.5.2008 has recommended release of the land of the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. Concluding part of this order reads thus:- “I have seen the location of the land on the Shajra Plan placed at Annexure 'A'. I have also perused the record pertaining to land acquisition. The area requested for release was partly constructed before Section 4 notification. The land stands earmarked for residential sector 46. School sites are provided in residential sectors. In view of this the land of the petitioner is recommended to be released with the condition that the petitioner will get the unauthorised construction compounded by paying the prescribed fee, seek change of land use permission, pay development charges and also obtain necessary permission from the competent authority in the Education Department to run the school. Also the petitioner will not raise any construction within 30 meters restricted belt of scheduled road namely Saharanpur-Yamuna Nagar Ladwa Pipli- CWP No. 3386 of 2007 -3- Pehowa-Guhla road. Additional Director, Urban Estates is directed to put up case for seeking the approval of the Government. The representationist be informed.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner expresses satisfaction on the aforementioned order passed by the Director, Urban Estates Department, Haryana and prays that the writ petition be dismissed as not pressed at this stage. He has also submitted that in case the recommendations made by the Director, Urban Estates Department, Haryana are not accepted by the respondent-State then he may be permitted to approach the Court once again if such a necessity arises. The prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted. The petition is dismissed as not pressed subject to further submissions made by him. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE (SABINA) May 27, 2008 JUDGE anita