IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 10292 of 2004. Date of Decision: 28th November, 2008. Bishan Singh & Ors. ..Petitioners through Mr. H.S.Dhandi, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. ..Respondents through Mr. G.S.Attariwala, Addl.AG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 10212 and 10292 of 2004 as both these cases arise out of the same acquisition proceedings. For the sake of brevity, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 10292 of 2004. The petitioners seek a Mandamus to direct the respondents to de-notify the land bearing Khewat/Khatauni No. 115/129, Khasra No. 884 acquired vide notifications dated 7.5.1991 and 18.3.1992 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, respectively, and in relation to which the award was passed on 15.3.1994. The petitioners were the owners of the aforementioned land which was acquired by the State of Punjab for development of an Industrial Area by the Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation Limited – respondent No. 3. Relying upon the site plan [Annexure P-6], it is alleged that the lands shown in blue and green colours therein have already been de-notified and released from acquisition by the respondents, whereas the land owned by the petitioners and shown in yellow and red colours, is not being released/de-notified even when the “public purpose” for which the entire chunk of land was acquired, can no longer be achieved after the release of the lands shown in blue and green colours. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners have already deposited the compensation amount received for the land shown in yellow colour whereas no compensation has been paid to them for the land shown in red colour. The respondents have filed their counter-affidavit. It is averred that the land in the surrounding has been released on the recommendations of respondent No. 3 for whom the land was acquired by the State Government for setting up of the Industrial Focal Point at Ludhiana. It is maintained that the compensation as assesed by the Collector was offered to the petitioners but they did not accept the same. In para no. 8 of the written statement, however, the respondents have taken a plea that “no representation to de- notify the land comprised in Khasra No. 884 has been received by the answering department”. From the afore-stated stand taken in the written statement, it appears that the respondents themselves have lost interest in the project for which the subject land along with adjoining land was acquired. The respondents also did not dispute the fact that a substantial part of the acquired land has already been denotified. In the light of these undisputed facts, however, for want of sufficient material on record to form a definite opinion regarding discriminatory treatment, if any, meted out to the petitioners, no direction for the de-notification/release of the petitioners' land can be issued, more so when, it is well settled law that the land acquired for a particular 'public purpose' can be utilized for any 'other public purpose' also. At the same time, the respondents can not over look the fact that petitioners can be deprived of their property through compulsory acquisition only if the same is required for one or the other 'public purpose'. If the 'public purpose' has already fallen flat due to the release of the lands shown in blue and green colours in the site plan, Annexure P-6 and there is no other proposal to utilize the left-out land of the petitioners, there appears to be no rationale in not extending the same treatment to the petitioners, as has been given to other similarly situated land-owners of the land shown in blue and green colours. These are the issues, however, which pre- dominantly fall within the domain of the Executive and it is not expedient or desirable for this Court to express any definite views in relation thereto. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the State Government by way of a self- explanatory representation within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy along with a copy of the site plan [Annexure P-6], upon receipt whereof the Principal Secretary and/or any other officer nominated by him in the Department of Industries, Government of Punjab, shall consider the petitioners' claim regarding release/de-notification of their land, in accordance with law and government policies, if any and shall dispose of the same within three months by passing a speaking order. No costs. November 28, 2008. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE