AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
In the head note of the petition, following prayers have been made:-
“Civil Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the notifications dated 23.2.1989 (Annexure P-2) and 22.2.1990 (Annexure P-3) issued under sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act respectively, regarding 17 Biswas of land falling in Khasra No.3860/3867 Min and 3869 Min, Patti Insar, Tehsil and District Panipat, owned by the petitioners, which had been acquired for development and utilization of Sector 13, HUDA, Panipat, in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “2013 Act") as till date the physical possession of the land has not been taken from the petitioners by respondent HUDA and the same is still being utilized by the petitioners for the last almost 25 years of its acquisition and even the compensation has neither been released in favour of the petitioners nor it has been deposited with the learned reference court; Or Any other Writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and appropriate. may kindly be granted in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”
Learned counsel for the respondents-State 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 23.02.1989 and Notification under Section 6 of the Act of 1894 was issued on 22.02.1990 and the award had been passed on 21.02.1992. It is further submitted that the possession of the land in question was taken vide rapat roznamcha No.276 dated 21.02.1992. It is further pointed out that entire amount of compensation i.e., Rs.16,52,32,478/- has been tendered and out of the same, an amount of Rs.13,44,57,860/- has also been disbursed. It is also submitted that the present case is squarely covered against the petitioners by virtue of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and others reported as (2020) 8 SCC 129 as well as by this Court in case titled as “Gopal Singh Rathi and others Vs. State of Haryana and others”, passed in CWP-13333-2016, decided on 23.07.2026.
Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that even in case challenge to the acquisition is barred, the petitioners still have right to request the respondent-State to invoke its power under Section 101-A of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be referred as “the 2013 Act”) as it is the case of the petitioners that it is unviable and non-essential for the respondents to acquire the present land and thus, the petitioners seek to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to move a representation to the respondents-State for invoking the provisions of Section 101-A of the 2013 Act. It is submitted that the said aspect would still be open, even in case the petitioners give up their challenge to the Notifications and the award. It is further submitted that the respondent-authorities be directed to consider and decide the said representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, in accordance with law, in a time bound manner.
Learned counsel for the respondents-State has submitted that in case the petitioners are giving up their challenge to the notifications and the award and in case they file a representation requesting the respondents-State to invoke the power under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act, then, the said representation would be considered and decided after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, within a period of four months from the date of submission of the said representation.
Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the petitioners and the respondents-State, while permitting the petitioners to withdraw the present writ petition as far as challenge to the notifications and the award is concerned, the petitioners are permitted to file a representation requesting the respondents-State to invoke the power under Section 101-A of the 2013 Act within a period of one month from today and in case any such representation is filed, the respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the same after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the said representation.
It is made clear that the said representation would only be filed on the aspect of Section 101-A of the 2013 Act and this Court has not opined on the merits of the same and the same would be considered independently in accordance with law.
All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.