Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

AMAR SINGH & ORS versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


AMAR SINGH & Ors v. STATE OF HARYANA & Ors - CWP-19312-2005 [2005] RD-P&H 103 (17 August 2005)

CWP NO.19312 OF 2005 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP NO.19312 OF 2005 (O&M)

DATE OF DECISION: 22.12.2005

Amar Singh and others ...Petitioner.

Versus

State of Haryana and others ..Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.S. KHEHAR
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K. MITTAL

PRESENT: Mr. Mukand Gupta, Advocate

for the petitioners

J.S. Khehar, J. (oral)

The land of the petitioners was sought to be acquired through a notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') dated 20.5.1983 for allotment of residential plots to homeless Harijans, members of backward classes and economical weaker persons in village. The aforesaid tentative determination came to be crystalised with the issuance of a declaration dated 12.7.1983 under section 6 of the Act. More than 22 years have elapsed since the CWP NO.19312 OF 2005 (O&M) 2

aforesaid acquisition process came to be finalised through the issuance of the declaration under section 6 of the Act. Now when proceedings for taking possession of the land still with the petitioners have been initiated, the petitioners have sought to challenge the action of the respondents in acquiring their land on various grounds.

It is not possible for us at this juncture to entertain any claim at the hands of the petitioner, on the basis of which they could have impugned the action of the authorities in acquiring their land as far back as in July 1983.

It would also be relevant to mention, that the petitioners claim, that they also belong to the backward category, and would be rendered homeless and landless in case the acquisition proceedings initiated against the petitioners referred to above, are allowed to be sustained. The instant plea, to our mind, is a plea unsustainable in law. As and when proceedings for acquisition are initiated, a number of land owners are deprived of their residential properties. This consequence is an inevitable result of any acquisition proceedings, and in case the instant plea is accepted, no acquisition proceedings can ever fructify.

For the reasons recorded above, we find no merit in this petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. If the petitioners have any CWP NO.19312 OF 2005 (O&M) 3

subsisting claim for compensation on account of the acquired land, it will be open to them to initiate proceedings before a Court of competent jurisdiction.

( J.S. Khehar )

Judge

( A.K. Mittal )

December 22, 2005. Judge

vig


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.