Mam Chand vs State of Haryana and Another

N.K. Agrawal, J.—This is a petition by Mam Chand under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the notification dated October 22, 1997 issued u/s 4 and the notification of even date issued u/s 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the ''Act'').

Petitioner is the owner of certain land. Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act were issued by the State of Haryana on October 22, 1997 so as to ac- quire certain land situated in village Dadasya, Tehsil and District Faridabad. The land intended to be acquired included the land of the petitioner.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act were issued simultaneously, which was not permissible under the Act. Declaration u/s 6 could be issued only after the publication of the notification issued u/s 4 of the Act and not on the same date. Both the notifications were published on the same date, namely, October 22, 1997.

Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh Ors. Vs. Radhey Shyam Nigam and Others, , has held that after the Amending Act No. 68 of 1984, a declaration u/s 6 can only be made after the date of the publication of the notification u/s 4 of the Act. There must be difference of dates between the date of the publication of the notification u/s 4 and 6. After the amendment, both the notifications cannot be published on the same date.

In the light of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, there is found no escape from the conclusion that the notification issued by the State of Haryana u/s 6 of the Act qua the petitioner, cannot be sustained.

The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. Notification issued u/s 6 of the Act on October 22, 1997 is quashed qua the petitioner. No order as to costs.