JUDGMENT
T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.
1. In this writ petition the petitioners are challenging the acquisition of their land under the provisions of Punjab Town Improvement Trust Act, 1922.
2. The Ludhiana Improvement Trust framed a scheme under the provisions of Section 28(2) read with Section 24 of the Act for development of an area of 32 acres including the land of the petitioners of an extent of 24 Kanals 5 Marias. The notification for acquisition of the land was issued on 10th September 1974. Notice Under Section 38 of the said Act was issued on 12th September, 1974. Objections were filed on 14th November, 1974. Thereafter nothing has been done by the Improvement Trust till 1977. On 16th May 1977, the Government approved the Scheme under the provisions of Section 41 of the Act. Thereafter, no steps have been taken by the improvement Trust to take possession of the land till 1982. No award determining the compensation was also passed. On 21st August, 1982, a notice was issued Under Section 9(3) of the Land Acquisition Act but the Trust has not taken possession of the land even after the issuance of the notice on 21st August, 1982. Thereafter, the petitioners filed this writ petition No. 3787 of 1982 challenging the acquisition proceedings. By an interim order, dated 24th February 1983, a stay of dispossession was granted in favour of the petitioners.
3. The only point that arises in this writ petition is whether the acquisition proceedings could be continued in spite of the long delay in completion of the land acquisition proceedings and without passing an award within a reasonable time.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the instructions issued by the State of Punjab on 28th December, 1979. Under the said instructions the land sought to be acquired has to be taken in possession within one year from the date of issue of the notification Under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. It is also stated therein that if the possession of the land is not taken within one year after the issue of notification Under Section 6, the same would be deemed to have lapsed. A Full bench of this Court in Radhey Sham Gupta and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors., (1982)84 P.L.R. 743 (F.B.), held that the unexplained inordinate delay in finalising the acquisition proceedings will make the proceedings lapsed.
5. The Govt. instructions dated 28th December 1979 came to be considered by a single Judge of this Court in Parkash Singh v. The State of Punjab and Anr. 1983 P.L.J. 259. The learned Judge held as follows :-
“The learned counsel however, concedes that possession of the land of the petitioner has not been taken in pursuance of the said award of the Land Acquisition Collector and the petitioner still continues to be in possession of this property. In the face of this admitted position the land in. question obviously has not vested in the Trust and as per the terms of Section 48 itself till the possession of the land sought to be acquired is taken the Government is full liberty to withdraw or abandon the acquisition proceedings. Thus it is patent that the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondent authorities in pursuance of the respective notifications issued Under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act stood withdrawn or abandoned with the issuance of the instructions dated December 28,1979.”
6. The said decision has also been followed by another single Judge of this Court in Iqbal Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab and Ors. (1988-1)93 Punjab Law Reporter 575. In that case also the acquisition proceedings started in the year 1973 but the possession was not taken. Dealing with the instructions issued by the Govt. of Punjab in December 28, 1973, the learned Single Judge observed that “in view of the instructions by the Government of Punjab since the possession was not taken within one year after the issuance of notification Under Section 42 of the Act, the acquisition proceedings stood abandoned or withdrawn.”
7. In view of the above legal position, I am of the view that the acquisition proceedings cannot be allowed to stand and in my view acquisition proceedings have lapsed due to efflux of time.
8. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the notifications issued by the Trust under the Punjab Town Improvement Trust Act, 1922 are hereby quashed. There will be no order as to costs,