High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Case Law Search
MANOJ PODDAR & Anr v. STATE OF HARYANA & Ors - CWP-11239-2006  RD-P&H 4770 (25 July 2006)
CASE NO.: CWP No.11239 of 2006
DATE OF DECISION: July 25, 2006
MANOJ PODDAR AND ANOTHER ...PETITIONERS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV.
PRESENT: MR. VIKRAM CHAUDHRI, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS.
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.
The petitioners have prayed for quashing of Notifications issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 17.11.2005, and the Notification dated 7.2.2006, issued under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act as well as the award dated 2.3.2006. The petitioners are owners in possession of land measuring 6 kanals 7 marlas situated in village Badhkhalsa, Tehsil & District Sonepat, Haryana. This land alongwith the lands of various other persons was acquired by the State of Haryana by issuance of Notifications under Section 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. The purpose of acquisition was for the development and utilization of land for residential, commercial and institutional purposes. The land was acquired for setting up Rajiv Gandhi Education City at Sonepat.
Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners in collaboration with various other land owners have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with one M/s Narang Construction and Financiers Pvt. Ltd.
whereby the land is acquired to raise construction for Group Housing/Residential and Commercial complex. It has been averred that the Builder has submitted an application form LC-1, prior to the issuance of the Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and has also deposited a huge sum for the grant of license. It is contended that the land of the petitioner falls across the road as per the plan and is right next to Ansal Group (another construction company) which has been granted license for setting up a similar Group Housing/Residential and Commercial complex. It has further been averred that the land acquired for the purpose of construction of Rajiv Gandhi Education City falls under Sectors 65, 66, 67 and 68 whereas the land of the petitioner falls in Section 62 and therefore, the land is not required for raising Education City.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner in detail and are unable to agree with the contentions raised by him. The validity of the Notifications issued under Section 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act were considered by us in CWP No.4300 of 2006 and the notifications have been upheld. It is immaterial that the land of the petitioner falls across the road and is next to Ansal Group. For the construction of residential, commercial and institutional sector, a large tract of land including the land of the petitioner has been acquired and there is no infirmity in the said acquisition. Even the award has been passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on 2.3.2006.
Thus, we are of the considered opinion that as the validity of the Notifications, Annexure P-3 and P-4 has already been upheld in CWP No.4300 of 2006, therefore, there is no merit in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed.
July 25, 2006 (NIRMAL YADAV)
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.