In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 5043 of 2008 Date of decision: 27.3.2008 Mahavir Parshad and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Saurav Mohunta, Advocate, for the petitioners. **** JUDGMENT SURYA KANT, J. In this civil writ petition, the petitioners have challenged acquisition of their land and they also seek quashing of the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which were issued on 26.8.2003 and 10.8.2004. The petitioners also seek quashing of the order passed by the High Power Committee, whereby their claim for the release of their land from acquisition, has been turned down. It is, however, not in dispute that much before the filing of the present petition, the Award had also been pronounced by the Land Acquisition Collector on 12.12.2006. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the decision of the High Power Committee, specially para 9 thereof which is self explanatory. CWP No. 5043 of 2008 -2- We do not find any legal infirmity in the said decision as more than one valid reasons have been assigned for not releasing the entire land of the petitioners. Consequently, we decline the petitioners' main prayer for release of their land from acquisition. Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though a small piece of land measuring 3 Kanals, owned by the petitioners has been released from acquisition, as is depicted from the site plan (Annexure P-3), however, no access to the same is provided. It is argued that the petitioners would not be able to utilise the said piece of land for any purpose. We are, however, of the considered view that if the plea taken by the petitioners is factually correct, the respondents should consider the feasibility of providing access to the said piece of land so that the petitioners may utilise the same for an authorised purpose only. In this regard, the petitioners may represent to the respondent- authorities within a period of one month and any such representation made by them, shall be considered and dispose of by the Competent Authority as per the Government policy and/or the provisions of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 within a period of four months from the date of its receipt. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (SURYA KANT) JUDGE (SABINA) March 27, 2008 JUDGE anita