Sudhir Shingla and Others vs State of Haryana and Others

Surya Kant, J.—The petitioners, though have not questioned the acquisition of their entire land/property acquired by the State of Haryana for the public purpose of development of Sectors 6, 7 and 8 in the Urban Estate, Panipat by the Haryana Urban Development Authority, their principal grievance is that the entire constructed portion along with proper passage has not been exempted from the acquisition. The petitioners, thus, seek a mandamus that instead of 10,000 sq. yards, a total area of 33329 sq. yards be released from acquisition.

The petitioners have in para No. 1 of the writ petition stated that more than one industrial units/business establishments are being run by them and all such units are located on the acquired land. It appears to be their case that most of the constructed portion has been released but a part of it along with open space has been acquired. The petitioners, therefore, assert that the remaining constructed portion as well as free passage to the released properties, also deserve to be exempted from acquisition.

The respondents have filed their written statements inter-alia maintaining that construction over a portion of the land of petitioners was found during the survey conducted before issuing notification dated 10.05.1989 u/s 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act''), hence the land measuring 10 Bighas along with proportionate open area was left out of acquisition after considering the objections u/s 5A of the Act. As regards to the acquired vacant land, it is maintained that the same is needed for the notified public purpose.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

The bonafide of the public purpose is unquestionable, moreso, when the notified Urban Estate has since been developed by Haryana Urban Development Authority. At the same time, it is undeniable that State Government has taken a policy decision dated 26.10.2007 to release the structures/buildings which are found in existence at the time of issuance of Section 4 notification.

Since the grievance of the petitioners in the instant writ petition is confined to a part of the constructed portion and/or free passage to the released properties and such a claim put forth by them appears to be just, fair and reasonable, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondents to conduct a fresh survey/demarcation of the acquired area of the petitioners and consider the desirability of releasing the constructed portion which was found in existence at the time of issuance of Section 4 notification as well as sufficient open space for free access to the released properties. The fresh survey and demarcation shall be conducted after advance notice to the petitioners or their representative.

The appropriate orders regarding release of property, if any, shall be passed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.