Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2016 DAILYLAW 4066 (PNJ)

PRITIPAL SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

CWP/14688/2016 · 2026-09-03

Divya Sharma, Vikas Bahl

body2016

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CWP-14688-2016 [1] 212 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14688-2016 Date of decision: 03.09.2026 Pritipal Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE DIVYA SHARMA Present: Mr. Vinay Kumar Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Udit Garg, Advocate for respondent No.3-HSIIDC. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. In the head note of the petition, following prayers have been made:- “CIVIL WRIT PETITION under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari to quash the acquisition proceedings qua the land of the petitioner, situated in village Machgarh, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad, comprising in Khasra No.39//13/2, 18//2/1 as shown in Jamabandi for the year 2001-02, pursuant to notification under Section 4 dated 31.07.2006 (Annexure P-3), notification under Section 6 dated 09.08.2007 (Annexure P-4) of the Land acquisition Act, 1894 and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom including Award dated 29.07.2008 (Annexure PAWAN KUMAR 2026.09.07 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-14688-2016 [2] P-5) on the ground of acquisition proceedings having lapsed in view of provision under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, as the physical possession of the land in question has not been taken by the respondents. And/or; Further for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing the respondents to release the entire land of the petitioner, situated in village Machgarh, Tehsil Ballabgarh, Distt. Faridabad, comprising in Khasra No. 39//13/2, 18//2/1 shown in Jamabandi for the year 2001-02, from acquisition, pursuance to notification under Section 4, dated 31.07.2006, notification under Section 6 dated 09.08.2007 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. And/or; Any other order or direction may kindly be passed which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit including declaration that proceedings under Land Acquisition Act have lapsed qua the land of the petitioners in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. And/or; It is further prayed that during pendency of the present Writ Petition and subject to outcome of the same, respondents may be restrained from dispossessing the land in question.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in the present case, Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act of 1894”) was issued on 31.07.2006 and Notification under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 was issued on 09.08.2007 and the award had been passed on 29.07.2008 whereas the present writ petition has been filed after a delay of eight years i.e., in 2016. PAWAN KUMAR 2026.09.07 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-14688-2016 [3] It is submitted that respondents have executed rapat roznamcha and had taken the possession of the property in question. It is also submitted that the petitioner has also been offered a plot under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy vide letter of intent dated 21.07.2016. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the above, he seeks to withdraw the present writ petition but has submitted that till date, the possession of the plot which is allotted under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy has not been given to the petitioner and has submitted that in case after representing to the authorities, the possession of the plot is not delivered expeditiously then the petitioner be granted liberty to institute appropriate proceedings for the said relief. 4. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE (DIVYA SHARMA) JUDGE 03.09.2026 Pawan Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No PAWAN KUMAR 2026.09.07 16:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document