CWP No.22025 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 201/6 CWP No.22025 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: July 21st, 2026 Daroga Ram and others .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present: Mr. R.S. Manhas, Advocates for the petitioners. Mr. Rishabh Singla, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. R.S. Khosla, Senior Advocate with Mr. Yogender Verma, Advocate for respondent No.2-GMADA. VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the present writ petition, following prayers have been made: CIVIL WRIT PETITION under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus or such other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the impugned notification No.6/30/2010/6HG1/3946 dated 22.12.2010 (Annexure P-9) and No.6/30/2010/6HG1/3946 dated 22.12.2010 (Annexure P- 9) and Notification No.6/30/2010/6HG1/3480 dated 25.08.2011 (Annexure P-11) as illegal, motivated, violative of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India, ultravires the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and colourable exercise further of power and quashing the impugned notifications qua the constructed areas of the petitioners where the petitioner have constructed their houses; PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.27 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.22025 of 2011 (O&M) 2 AND To issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the present petition was filed by 28 persons and the same has been withdrawn qua petitioners No.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21 22, 23 and 26 and the same only survives qua petitioners No.6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, 24, 25, 27 and 28. 3. Learned senior counsel for respondent No.2 has pointed out that even qua the said petitioners, specific reasons have been given in the affidavit dated 17.07.2025 filed by Ravinder Singh, Estate Officer, in CWP-21385-2011 and a copy of the same has been given to the counsel for the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that, in the present petition, specific pleas regarding specific petitioners, more so those, whose grievances still remain have not been made and thus, he seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file fresh petition to give specific details to counter the affidavit filed by respondent No.2-authority, rejecting the case of the said petitioners. 5. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, petitioners are permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file a fresh petition on behalf of petitioners No.6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 17, 24, 25, 27 and 28 after giving full and better particulars. PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.27 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.22025 of 2011 (O&M) 3 6. It is made clear that in the fresh petition proposed to be filed, the affidavit filed by Ravinder Singh, Estate Officer in CWP-21385-2011, would also be annexed. 7. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE July 21st, 2026 (SUBHAS MEHLA) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.07.27 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh