CWP No.523 of 1988 -: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.523 of 1988
Date of decision: December 15, 2008.
Roop Chand & Ors.
...Petitioner(s)
v.
State of Haryana & Anr.
...Respondent(s)
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Shri HPS Ishar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri R.D. Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana,
for the respondents.
ORDER
Surya Kant, J. – (Oral):
This civil writ petition seeks quashing of the notifications dated
12.3.1987 and 14.12.1987 (Annexures P-1 & P-2) issued under Sections 4
and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 respectively whereby the land of
the petitioners measuring 24 kanal 5 marlas in village Lohinga Kalan,
Tehsil Ferozepur Jhirka, District Mewat has been acquired for a public
purpose, namely, for allotment of residential plots to landless/homeless
members of the Scheduled Castes, Backward classes and economically
weaker sections from the village.
CWP No.523 of 1988 -: 2 :-
Besides raising the technical objection of non-compliance of
the procedure laid down under Section 4 of the Act, namely, non-
publication of the notification in the local newspaper and/or that no munadi
was held in the village, the petitioners have specifically averred that the
Gram Panchayat of the village owns more than 50 acres of land a part
whereof could be utilized for the proposed public purpose.
The respondents have filed their counter affidavit in which it is
claimed that notification under section 4 was got published in the Mewat
Daily dated 3.5.1987 and the Indian Express dated 19.3.1987. It is claimed
that the munadi was also held. As regards the availability of more than 50
acres land owned by the Gram Panchayat, para 8 of the written statement
reads as follows:-
“8. Para 8 of the writ petition is incorrect and hence
denied. The panchayat land is at a distance of about
one furlong from the outer boundary of village. Near
the panchayat land, there is a ‘Grave Yard’ and this land
is situated beneath the hills. No person is willing to
settle down there. If the houses are constructed upon
the panchayat land, there is likelihood of the
construction money going waste. The land of the
petitioners is situated near the village abadi and is
adjacent to the Punhana Road. Certified copy of the
Akash Sijra showing the location of the village abadi,
panchayat land and under acquisition is at Annexure R-
5 to this reply.”
On 18.1.1988 while issuing notice of motion, the parties were
CWP No.523 of 1988 -: 3 :-
directed to maintain status quo regarding possession. The said interim order
was made absolute while admitting the writ petition.
It would, thus, be seen that the petitioners are retaining
possession of the acquired land from the last about 20 years under the orders
of this Court.
The only plea taken by the respondents for not utilizing the
gram panchayat land is that it was little far away from the village abadi and
people were reluctant to construct houses as there was graveyard near the
gram panchayat land.
Much water has flown during this long period of over 20 years.
The villages have expanded and congestion has increased. It is quite
possible that the residential locality of the village has also spread over and
reached beyond the gram panchayat land. The petitioners are agriculturists
and the subject land appears to be their source of livelihood. The salutary
object behind the public purpose for which the land was acquired is
undoubtedly commendable and is now one of the obligation cast upon the
Gram Panchayats, being an institution of self-governance, under the
Eleventh Schedule to the Constitution. Incidentally, the panchayat land is
available in plenty to achieve the afore-said object.
Considering the totality of the circumstances, I am fully
convinced that the matter requires reconsideration by the authorities in
consultation with the Gram Panchayat of the village. Assuming that the
panchayat land is still at a far-off distance, there can be a proposal to
exchange the said land with the petitioners.
Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to
the petitioners to approach the authorities with a supplementary
CWP No.523 of 1988 -: 4 :-
representation, in the absence thereof this writ petition shall be taken as a
representation on their behalf and the respondents are directed to reconsider
the whole matter afresh and in a dispassionate manner. The possibility of
releasing the petitioners’ land and to utilize the Gram Panchayat land in lieu
thereof for the subject ‘public purpose’ shall be explored. Till then, the
order of status quo shall continue.
No costs.
December 15, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge