C.W.P.No. 14917 of 2008. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 14917 of 2008. Date of Decision : 15.12.2008. M/S. Tinna Overseas Ltd. Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others. Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH. --- Present:- Mr.Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Palika Monga, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. Dheeraj Chawla, Advocate, for respondent No.2. --- 1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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? M.M.KUMAR,J. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for quashing notifications dated 16.6.2006 and 15.6.2007 (Annexures P-5 and P-6) issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ( for brevity, 'the Act')whereby the Government has sought to acquire land for public purpose, namely, for development of Industrial Estate in villages Dadlana and Rajapaur, Panipat It is an admitted position that award in respect of the acquired land has already been announced on 30.4.2008 C.W.P.No. 14917 of 2008. 2 before filing of the instant petition, which has been filed on 23.8.2008. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner at a considerable length, we find that there is no ground made out to accept the contention raised by the petitioner and to quash the acquisition proceedings subject matter of instant petition. Award in the present case has already been announced on 30.4.2008 before filing of the instant petition, which has been filed on 23.8.2008. It is well settled that no writ petition would be maintainable against acquisition proceedings after passing of award because possession of land is taken and it is deemed to be vested in the State Government. In that regard, reliance may be placed on the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana , (1996) 11 SCC 698; MunicipalCouncil Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2 SCC 48; C.Padma v. Dy. Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, (1977) 2 SCC 627; and M/S. Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008(2) SC 280. There is thus, no ground to interfere. In view of above, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. (M.M.KUMAR ) JUDGE 15.12.2008 ( JORA SINGH) Anoop JUDGE C.W.P.No. 14917 of 2008. 3