IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH. CWP No.10084 of 2009 Date of decision: 5.8.2009 Chandan Madan and others ....Petitioners. vs. State of Haryana and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S.KHEHAR. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. --- Present: Mr.Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate, for the petitioners. -- J.S.KHEHAR,J. (Oral) The petitioners claim to have purchased the land in question in the year 2005. After the petitioners purchased the land the State Government issued a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking to acquire 305 acres, 5 kanals 15 marlas of land situated within the revenue estates of village Manakpur, Udhamgarh and Garhi Banjaran District Yamuna Nagar vide notification dated 11.7.2007. The petitioners claim that they had filed objections under section 5-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on 8.8.2007. Despite the aforesaid objections, the State Government issued a notification under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 crystalizing its intention to acquire the land of the petitioners which was a part of the land sought to be acquired. In spite of the fact that the notification under section 6 of the Act was issued on 10.7.2008, the petitioners have approached this Court after a lapse of one year, inasmuch as, the instant writ petition was filed on 9.7.2009. On this account alone, the instant writ petition deserves to be dismissed. Be that as it may, the solitary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that land adjacent to the land of the petitioners has been ordered to be released, whereas, three plots of land one of which comprised CWP No.10084 of 2009 -2- the land of the petitioners falling adjacent to one another, has been sought to be acquired. In this behalf, learned counsel for the petitioners has invited this Court's attention to the Sajra plan placed on the record of this case as Annexure P6. We have perused Annexure P6 in order to ascertain the solitary contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the merits of the case. A perusal of the Sajra plan reveals the land sought to be released which has been depicted in green colour. The entire land depicted in green colour has been described as, abadi or industrial units. Thus viewed, it is apparent whilst the land which has been released is in actual use for running industries or for residential purpose ,whereas, undisputedly the land of the petitioners is vacant. In view of the above we find no justification even on the merits of the claim raised by the petitioners. For the reasons recorded hereinabove, the instant writ petition is dismissed. ( J.S.Khehar) Judge (S.D.Anand) Judge August 5, 2009, rk