1 184 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AMARJIT SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: None for the petitioner. HARKESH MANUJA Prayer in the present civil revision petition is for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the exec application bearing EXE Punjab and Anr.” 2. Admittedly, Villages Goindwal, Jhander Kalan and Khak notifications dat the Land Acqu namely, construction of the market valu acre for barani, acre for gair mu 3. Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner filed reference petition challenging the came to be allowed vide judgment compensation was enhanced from Rs. Rs.1,60,000/- Rs.Rs.80,000/- kadim and Rs.15,000/ kinds of land. Still aggrieved, the petitioner approach of RFA-1354-2005 enhanced to Rs.110/ Thereafter, the petitioner filed execution petition bearing No.EXE/ before learned District Judge, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: AMARJIT SINGH Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA None for the petitioner. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present civil revision petition is for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the exec application bearing EXE-27 of 2025, titled as Punjab and Anr.” in a time bound manner. Admittedly, certain land situated within Villages Goindwal, Jhander Kalan and Khak ted 29.06.1988 and 03.01.198 uisition Act, 1894 respectiv construction of Nucleus Complex, Goindwal. ue as Rs.40,000/- per acre for , Rs.7000/- per acre for banja umkin kinds of land. Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner filed reference petition challenging the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector came to be allowed vide judgment dated compensation was enhanced from Rs.40,000/ per acre for chahi/nehri, Rs.20,000/ per acre for barani, Rs.7,000/ and Rs.15,000/- per acre to Rs.60,000/ . Still aggrieved, the petitioner approach 2005 and the amount of compensation was further to Rs.110/- per square yard vide order dated Thereafter, the petitioner filed execution petition bearing No.EXE/ before learned District Judge, Tarn Taran on 31.07.2025 CR-8559-2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-8559-2025 Date of Decision: February 04, 2026 ........Petitioner ........Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Prayer in the present civil revision petition is for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the execution , titled as “Amarjit Singh vs. State of situated within the revenue estate of Villages Goindwal, Jhander Kalan and Khak was acquired vide 89 under Sections 4 and 6 of vely for the public purpose Complex, Goindwal. The LAC assessed r chahi/nehri, Rs.20,000/- per ar kadim and Rs.15,000/- per Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner filed reference petition passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, which dated 23.04.2005 and the 40,000/- per acre to Rs. , Rs.20,000/- per acre to , Rs.7,000/- to Rs.28,000/- for banjar o Rs.60,000/- per acre for gair mumkin . Still aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by way and the amount of compensation was further per square yard vide order dated 19.10.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner filed execution petition bearing No.EXE/27/2025 Tarn Taran on 31.07.2025 seeking 2025 February 04, 2026 Petitioner Prayer in the present civil revision petition is for issuance of ution Amarjit Singh vs. State of of e f for the public purpose d r r Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioner filed reference petition , which and the per acre to Rs. per acre to banjar gair mumkin this Court by way and the amount of compensation was further . 2025 seeking TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.05 17:20 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 CR-8559-2025 execution of the aforesaid judgment, however, the same is being repeatedly adjourned. 4. A perusal of record shows that execution petition filed by the petitioner is still pending and the petitioner is waiting to get their full amount of compensation on the basis of decision dated 19.10.2015 passed by this Court. 5. In Rahul S. Shah Vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others (2021) 6 SCC 418, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as follows:- “That the executing Court must dispose of execution proceeding within 6 months from the date of filing which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay.” 6. In view of the aforementioned legal position, the Executing Court is requested to dispose of the execution No.EXE/27/2025 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 06 months from today, as any further delay may cause serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioner-land owner. 7. It is made clear that nothing stated herein-above shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the execution proceedings. 04.02.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.02.05 17:20 I agree to specified portions of this document