Civil Revision No. 7812 of 2011 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7812 of 2011 Date of decision. 16.12.2011 Sanjiv Kumar .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate for the petitioner. **** Vijender Singh Malik, J. CM No.30206-CII of 2011 The application praying for exemption from filing certified copies of annexures P-1, P-2 and P-4 is allowed. CR No. 7812 of 2011 Sanjiv Kumar, petitioner who had brought an execution application before learned Additional District Judge, Sahibzada Ajit Singh Nagar, Mohali (for short 'the Executing Court') has challenged the order dated 19.11.2011 (Annexure P-3) vide which learned Executing Court has declined to release the amount of compensation, deposited by GMADA with the court under the directions of Hon'ble Apex Court, to the petitioner. Civil Revision No. 7812 of 2011 --2-- For the land of Sanjiv Kumar, petitioner, which was acquired by the respondent, this court had enhanced the amount of compensation. GMADA went in appeal against the said enhancement before Hon'ble Apex Court. Vide order dated 29.09.2011, Hon'ble Apex Court directed GMADA to deposit the amount as directed by the High Court before the Reference Court within four months. In compliance with the said directions, GMADA had deposited the amount before the Reference Court. Sanjiv Kumar, petitioner then sought release of the said amount. Learned Executing Court has observed vide the order dated 19.11.2011 that so far as release of the amount of compensation is concerned, Hon'ble Apex Court, who is seized of the matter, has not ordered the amount to be released to the land owner during pendency of the appeal before it. Under these circumstances, it was not found proper by learned Executing Court to release the amount to the land owner as there was no direction from Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard. Aggrieved by the order dated 19.11.2011, the applicant Sanjiv Kumar had brought this revision petition under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India. I have heard Mr.Naresh Kaushal, learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record carefully. Civil Revision No. 7812 of 2011 --3-- The amount which is due to the petitioner under the orders of this Court and has been deposited by GMADA on the directions of Hon'ble Apex Court, is certainly there with learned Executing Court. It is payable to the applicant-petitioner and the prayer in this regard has been declined for the only reason that there is no direction from Hon'ble Apex Court for release of the said amount to the land owner. Learned Executing Court has not taken into consideration the fact that there is no direction from by Hon'ble Apex Court for not releasing this amount. In the absence of a direction for not releasing the amount to the land owner, the amount could not be withheld by the court. As per the directions of the High Court, this amount is to be paid to the land owners and there is no order of Hon'ble Apex Court not to release the amount to the land owners. The concern of learned Executing Court can well be imagined. While the matter is still subjudice, the possibility of reversal of the order of the High Court is there. Reversal of the order of the High Court would require recovery of the amount from the land owners if the same had been released to them. The learned Executing Court by not releasing the amount has only tried to ensure that no such complication would arise in future. However, without any stay from Hon'ble Apex Court, learned Executing Court has withheld the amount from the land owner, who is entitled to get this amount because his land stands Civil Revision No. 7812 of 2011 --4-- acquired and he is left with no means of livelihood. At the most, the learned Executing Court could direct the applicant to furnish requisite surety before the release of the amount. In these circumstances, the impugned order cannot be sustained. The revision petition is consequently allowed and the amount is ordered to be released to the petitioner subject to the petitioner furnishing requisite surety for the amount of his entitlement to the satisfaction of the learned Executing Court. 16.12.2011 ( Vijender Singh Malik ) dinesh Judge