IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.7446 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 5.1.2011 Daya Ram & Ors. ......Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Haryana & Ors. ......Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG * * * Present: Mr. Shailendra Jain, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana. Jasbir Singh, (Oral) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to lay challenge to notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short the 'Act') issued on 25.4.2008 and 22.4.2009 respectively proposing to acquire vast track of land including the land owned by the petitioners comprising Khasra No.12//9/1(4-0). In the bunch of cases, a consolidated reply has been filed by the State in CWP No.6166 of 2010 qua the claim of the petitioners. In this writ petition, in the reply, it has been stated as under: “That it is respectfully submitted that the petitioners in the instant writ petition are seeking release of their land parcels comprising in Khasra No.12//9/1(4- 0) of village Kharkhari, tehsil Farukhnagar and district Gurgaon, from acquisition by the State Government, in the instant land acquisition proceedings. It is further submitted that the land of the petitioners comprising in khasra No.12//9/1(4-0) of village Kharkhari, tehsil Farukhnagar and district Gurgaon, is not forming part of the notification dated 25.4.2008 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioners becomes infructuous on this ground alone.” It is the specific stand of the respondent-State that land of the petitioners is not the subject matter of notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act. If that is so, this writ petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. (JASBIR SINGH) JUDGE January 5, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE