CWP-16365-2018 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 111 CWP-16365-2018 Date of Decision: 20.07.2026 Inder Singh and others …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present: - Mr. Bikramjit Singh, Advocate for Mr. J.S. Thind, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. On 31.07.2018, this Court passed the following order: - “Counsel for the petitioners submits that connected appeal filed by the other landowners bearing RFA No.4955 of 2016 stands admitted (Annexure P-9). Keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Babua Ram & others Vs. State of U.P. and another, (1995) 2 SCC 689, and Bharatsing Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2018(1) RCR (Civil) 497, the counsel is not in a position to press the claim for directions at this point of time to the respondents to decide the petition under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Accordingly, the writ petition is admitted. To be heard along with RFA No.4955 of 2016.” 2. Learned State counsel submits that this Court vide order dated 22.04.2026 has adjudicated a bunch of appeals including RFA No.4445 of 2016 and RFA No.4955 of 2016. The petitioners may file fresh application under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in terms of aforesaid order. MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.20 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-16365-2018 -2- 3. In the wake of statement of learned State counsel, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press the petition. 4. In the backdrop, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to petitioners to file fresh application under Section 28A in terms of aforesaid order dated 22.04.2026 of this Court. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 20.07.2026 Mohit Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MOHIT KUMAR 2026.07.20 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.