IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.15785 of 2011 Date of decision: 26.08.2011 M/s Northern Strips Limited …..Petitioner versus National Highway Authority of India and others ……Respondents CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh Hon’ble Mr.Justice Augustine George Masih Present: Mr.Deepak Balyan, Advocate for the petitioner Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has laid challenge to a notification dated 31.8.2010, issued under Section 3-A(I) of National Highway Act, 1956 (in short, the Act). Challenge is also to a notification issued on 18.5.2011 under Section 3-D(2) of the Act, proposing to acquire land owned by the petitioner for a public purpose, namely, for building (widening/ four/ six-lanning, etc.), maintenance, management and operation of National Highway No.10 on the stretch of land from 30.00 KM to 86.500 KM (Bahadurgarh-Rohtak Section), in district Jhajjar. To lay challenge to the above said notifications, petitioner earlier also came to this Court and its writ petition bearing No.22323 of 2010 was disposed of vide order dated 15.12.2010 by observing as under:- “Report made by the Land Acquisition Collector shows that on the land, which is proposed to be acquired for construction of Toll Plaza, an industrial unit is in existence. The competent authority has yet not taken final decision to acquire the land. CWP No.15785 of 2011 We are hopeful that the authorities will consider recommendation made by the Land Acquisition Collector in a sympathetic manner and if it is possible to save running industrial unit of the petitioner, an attempt be made to do the same. The writ petition stands disposed of.” When above order was passed, a hope was expressed that the authority will consider recommendation made by the Land Acquisition Collector to release land of the petitioner, in a sympathetic manner so that running industrial unit of the petitioner can be saved. Thereafter, as per final notification, petitioner’s land measuring 6 kanal 5 marla was kept out of acquisition and only land measuring 2 kanal 11 marla, which falls in the road alignment, was ordered to be acquired. It is grievance of the petitioner that the said land is going to be used to construct a Toll Plaza, which, as per plan, should have been constructed on the portion of the land owned by respondent No.7, whose land is situated opposite to the land owned by the petitioner. We have seen the site plan Annexure P8A, which clearly demonstrates that land of the petitioner falls in the road alignment and the Toll Plaza is going to be constructed on the land situated on another side of the road. In view of above, no case is made out for interference. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 26.08.2011 (Augustine George Masih) gk Judge 2 2