CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 17774 OF 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: March 8, 2011. Parties Name Santosh Pahwa and another ...PETITIONERS VERSUS State of Haryana and others ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg PRESENT: Mr. Abinash Singh, Adv., for Mr. Aman Arora, for the petitioners Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana, for respondents No. 1,3 and 4,. Mr. Gitish Bhardwaj, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. Jasbir Singh, J. (oral) JUDGMENT By filing this writ petition, petitioners have laid challenge to the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on November 30, 2006 and November 28, 2007, respectively. Further challenge has been laid to an Award passed on November 26, 2009. When notice of motion was issued, following contention of counsel for the petitioners was noticed by this Court: CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 17774 OF 2010 -2- “It is specific case of the petitioners that as per record available with the authorities, address of the petitioners is House No. 938, Sector 7, Panchkula (Haryana) whereas notices, if any, were sent to the petitioners at House No. 938, Sector 8, Panchkula. It is stated that at no time, the petitioners received any notice before rendering decision on objections filed by them under Sections 5-A and 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.” In response to notice, reply has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 3. In para No. 2 of the preliminary objections, it has been stated as under: “That the petitioners have not approached this Hon'ble High Court with clean hands because they have concealed the material factum that the correspondence was made at the house No. 938, Sector 8, Panchkula, whereas the notice of hearing of objections u/S 5-A was sent at the address House No. 938, Sector 7, Panchkula, the copy of dispatch register is annexed as annexure R/1 for ready reference of this Hon'ble High Court and petitioner No. 2 appeared before the Land Acquisition Collector at the time of hearing of objections U/S 5-A through her counsel Sh. Balwinder Singh Sudan. Thus the petitioners is trying to mislead this Hon'ble High Court and want to hijack the process of law by giving the wrong facts.” CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 17774 OF 2010 -3- It is specifically mentioned in the reply that petitioner No. 2 appeared before the Land Acquisition Collector. If that is so, this Court is of the opinion that an attempt was made to mislead the Court by raising a false plea to the contrary. Furthermore, this writ petition having been filed after passing of an Award on November 26, 2009, possibly cannot be entertained in view of ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Swarn Lata v. State of Haryana, AIR 2010 Supreme Court 1664. It is also not in dispute that the land owned by the petitioners is lying vacant at the spot. In view of above, no case is made out for interference. Otherwise also, the above said acquisition has been upheld by this Court vide judgment dated January 25, 2011, passed in CWP No. 18278 of 2008 titled as Ram Karan and others v. State of Haryana and others. Dismissed. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge (Rakesh Kumar Garg) Judge March 8, 2011. DKC