M/s Advance Med-Tech Limited vs State Of Haryana & Anr.

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

This is an application filed under Section 151 CPC for preponement of the date of hearing in the abovementioned case.

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner has submitted that the main case is listed on 02.12.2026 and the same may kindly be preponed as the matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Court passed in CWP-6175-2025 on 13.08.2026 and other connected matters.

Learned State Counsel has submitted that they have no objection in case the matter is preponed and the present application is allowed but liberty be granted to the respondents as granted vide order dated 13.08.2026.

In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the date of hearing in the main case is preponed from 02.12.2026 to today and same is taken on Board for final disposal.

In the head note of the petition, following prayers have been made:-

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, the petitioner is owner and is in physical possession of land measuring 26 kanals 8 marlas in Village Narsinghpur, Tehsil and District Gurugram comprised in Khasra Nos.7//21/2(4-0), 7//22(8-0), 10//2/1/1 (3-4), 7//20/3 (2-4), 7//20/1 (5-0), 7//21/1 (4-0). It is further submitted that in the year 1994, the petitioner had applied for CLU qua subject land which was recommended by the SWS, however, no final decision was taken on the same. It is submitted that on 29.01.2003, Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued proposing to acquire the land in question along with other land and in the same, the petitioner had filed objection under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but subsequent Notification was issued on 28.01.2004. It is submitted that the State Government, taking into consideration the several writ petitions filed challenging the acquisition, on 27.10.2005 constituted a Committee and the Committee, on 08.02.2006, rejected the case of the petitioner but subsequent to the same, the petitioner filed CWP-2676-2006 in which notice of motion was issued and dispossession of the petitioner was stayed. Thereafter, the Ministerial Committee was constituted and the said Committee in its meeting dated 08.01.2008 recommended the release of the subject land and the said recommendation was approved by the State Government on 05.03.2008. It is submitted that on 22.03.2012, rapat roznamcha was entered into to the effect that the land in question was free from acquisition and award and the change of the land use permission was also granted to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner started raising the construction with respect to industry and thereafter, surprisingly, the State of Haryana vide order dated 29.07.2024, recalled the release letter issued in favour of the petitioner. It is submitted that a Coordinate Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.03.2025 had granted the interim relief to the petitioner which is continuing till date. It is submitted that the said order dated 29.07.2024 which is subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition is against law and deserves to be set aside on several issues including the issue of same being violative of the principle of natural justice inasmuch prior to the passing of the said order, no opportunity of hearing has been granted to the petitioner nor any show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. It is submitted that it is a matter of settled law that any action having civil consequences can be taken only after following the principle of natural justice.

Learned counsel for the respondents could not dispute the fact that no show cause notice or opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner prior to the passing of the order dated 29.07.2024. It is submitted on behalf of the respondents that in case the impugned order is set aside on the said point, the same should not be construed as an estoppel against the respondents from passing a fresh order after considering the pleas raised by the petitioner in pursuance of the show cause notice to be issued by the respondent-State.

It is not in dispute that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner, prior to the passing of the impugned order, withdrawing the release letter and thus the act of the respondent authorities was in violative of the principle of natural justice.

Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances, the present writ petition is partly allowed and the impugned order is set aside with the following observations/directions:-

It would be open to the respondents to issue a show cause notice to the petitioner and pass a fresh order after granting an opportunity to the petitioner to file a reply to the show cause notice and also after giving personal hearing to the petitioner or its representatives.

ii) It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of the cases and it would be open to the respondent authorities to pass a fresh order after issuing show cause notice and after hearing the petitioner or its representatives so as to comply with the principle of natural justice.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.