CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTiCE SURYA KANT. Vs. Santra and others .....Petitioners - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1158332
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJul-03-2014
AppellantCORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTiCE SURYA KANT.
RespondentSantra and others .....Petitioners
Excerpt:
in the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh civil writ petition no.11948 of 2014 date of decision: july 03, 2014 santra and others .....petitioners versus state of haryana and others .....respondents coram : hon'ble mr.justice surya kant. hon'ble mrs.justice lisa gill. ***** present : mr.arun yadav, advocate, for the petitioners.mr.r.d.sharma, senior dag, haryana. -.- 1. whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. to be referred to the reporters or not?. 3. whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?. --- surya kant, j. (oral) notice of motion to respondent nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 only at this stage. on our asking, mr.r.d.sharma, learned senior deputy advocate general, haryana, accepts notice on their behalf. let four copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned state counsel during the cours.of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non- prosecution. in view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, neither counter-reply from respondent nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 is needed nor respondent no.2 be served at this stage. the petitioners seek quashing of the notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued under sections 4 & 6 kumar mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 i attest to the accuracy of this order chandigarh cwp no.11948 of 2014 [2].of the land acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act').respectively, to the extent of acquisition of their land fully described in para nos.2 to 5 of the writ petition. the above-stated land was acquired for development and utilization of residential sector-10, jhajjar. the short grievance of the petitioners is that much before issuance of notification under section 4 of the act, they had constructed residential house(s).the photographs whereof are as annexures p-11 to p-16. in support of the claim that houses were constructed prior to section-4 notification, receipts regarding deposit of the electricity power charges are also relied upon. on this premise, the petitioners contend that the residential house(s) deserve to be released from acquisition in terms of the government policy dated 26.10.2007 as amended on 24.01.2011. reliance is also placed on various orders passed by this court on the basis of the above-stated policy decisions. having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the question as to whether or not the house(s) as depicted in the photographs (annexure p-5) were constructed prior to issuance of section-4 notification, is essentially a question of fact which can be effectively determined by the respondent-authorities on consideration of the documents relied upon by the petitioners or any other additional document that they may produce. consequently, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the land acquisition collector-respondent no.4 to verify the above-mentioned claim of the petitioners with further direction to the respondent-authorities that if the house(s) are found to have been constructed before issuance of section-4 notification, let kumar mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 i attest to the accuracy of this order chandigarh cwp no.11948 of 2014 [3].an appropriate decision in terms of the above-mentioned government policies be taken within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. till such decision is taken, both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo regarding demolition of the existing structures. ordered accordingly. dasti. [surya kant].judge july 03, 2014 [lisa gill].mohinder judge kumar mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 i attest to the accuracy of this order chandigarh
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11948 of 2014 Date of Decision: July 03, 2014 Santra and others .....Petitioners versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL.

***** Present : Mr.Arun Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.R.D.Sharma, Senior DAG, Haryana.

-.- 1.

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?.

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?.

--- Surya Kant, J.

(Oral) Notice of motion to respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 only at this stage.

On our asking, Mr.R.D.Sharma, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on their behalf.

Let four copies of the writ petition be supplied to the learned State counsel during the couRs.of day failing which this order shall be automatically recalled and the writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed for non- prosecution.

In view of the nature of order which we propose to pass, neither counter-reply from respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 & 5 is needed nor respondent No.2 be served at this stage.

The petitioners seek quashing of the notifications dated 07.07.2011 and 06.07.2012 issued under Sections 4 & 6 Kumar Mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh CWP No.11948 of 2014 [2].of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').respectively, to the extent of acquisition of their land fully described in para Nos.2 to 5 of the writ petition.

The above-stated land was acquired for development and utilization of residential Sector-10, Jhajjar.

The short grievance of the petitioners is that much before issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, they had constructed residential house(s).the photographs whereof are as Annexures P-11 to P-16.

In support of the claim that houses were constructed prior to Section-4 notification, receipts regarding deposit of the electricity power charges are also relied upon.

On this premise, the petitioners contend that the residential house(s) deserve to be released from acquisition in terms of the Government Policy dated 26.10.2007 as amended on 24.01.2011.

Reliance is also placed on various orders passed by this Court on the basis of the above-stated policy decisions.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the question as to whether or not the house(s) as depicted in the photographs (Annexure P-5) were constructed prior to issuance of Section-4 notification, is essentially a question of fact which can be effectively determined by the respondent-authorities on consideration of the documents relied upon by the petitioners or any other additional document that they may produce.

Consequently, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Land Acquisition Collector-respondent No.4 to verify the above-mentioned claim of the petitioners with further direction to the respondent-authorities that if the house(s) are found to have been constructed before issuance of Section-4 notification, let Kumar Mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh CWP No.11948 of 2014 [3].an appropriate decision in terms of the above-mentioned Government Policies be taken within a period of four months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order.

Till such decision is taken, both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo regarding demolition of the existing structures.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT].JUDGE July 03, 2014 [LISA GILL].Mohinder JUDGE Kumar Mohinder 2014.07.30 12:13 I attest to the accuracy of this order Chandigarh