ORDER
V.K. Bali, J.
1. S.D. Processors Private Limited alongwith Smt. Raj Rani takes strong exception to the acquisition of vacant land of their industrial unit as has been fully described in Annexure P-1 by filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Even though the basic challenge in the writ petition is to the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 issued under the Land Acquisition Act on 23.2.1989 and 22.2.1990 respectively, but at the time of arguments the only point raised is that by exempting the constructed portion of a running factory, run by the petitioner, the open space has been acquired in such a manner that the existing unit of the petitioners would come to a grinding halt as also that the open space is between the construction of the petitioners unit cannot be put to any meaningful use by the respondents for the purpose for which land has been
acquired i.e. for the development and utilization of land as a Residential and Commercial area for Sector 17, Panipat. Mr. V.K. Jain learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners on the basis of Annexure
P-1 site plan, the authenticity of which has not been disputed by the State even remotely, contends that the factory of the petitioner is sandwiched in between number of industrial units, the land of which industrial units has not been acquired and if acquired has been left from array of acquisition later. In so far as the factory of the petitioner itself is concerned, there are two vivid constructed portions one of the Western side and the other on the Eastern side. There is construction on the Southern and Northern flanks as well. It is in between portions of various constructions described above that the open space which is very much necessary for meaningful running of the factory unit of the petitioner that has been acquired.
2. As mentioned above, it is an admitted position that 2 Bighas 6 Biswas out of land measuring 5 Bighas 14 Biswas in between the boundary wall of the factory has been left out from acquisition and it is only 3 Bighas 8 Biswas of land which
is an open space between the construction, referred to above, which has been acquired. It is also proved to the hilt that the entire industrial unit of the petitioner on both left and right side is surrendered by existing industrial units which too have either been not acquired or later left out from array of acquisition. It is, thus, evident that the open space measuring 3 Bighas 8 Biswas cannot be put to any meaningful use by the respondent-authorities and in particular for the purpose for which the land has been acquired i.e. for the development and utilization of land as Residential and Commercial area for Sector 17, Panipat. Also if the open space is acquired, it will be very difficult for the petitioner to run the industrial unit, if it may not be impossible. In peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, thus, this Court is convinced that either the State should have acquired the entire property or left out from array of acquisition the vacant portion as well. Acquiring the land in such a way and not leaving from acquisition the open space would cause only miseries and hardships to the petitioner. Even the Respondent-State cannot put the open space to any meaningful use. Thus, there is no choice with the Court but to allow this petition and to hold that notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act with regard to vacant possession of land not justified and thus deserves to be quashed qua the land of the petitioners. Ordered accordingly. Parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.