STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAGHUBIR DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) Notification under Section 4 (1 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (I of 1894 (for short 'the Act') , was published in the State Gazette on 25/10/1988, in the local newspapers Dainik Veer (Hindi) and in Indian Express on 16/11/1988. The substance of that notification was got published in the locality on 27/4/1989. Similarly, declaration under Section 6 was published in the State Gazette on 1/8/1989, in Veer Arjun (Hindi) on 10/8/1989 and in Patriot (English) on 8/8/1989. In the chart showing the dates of publication of notification found in the counter-affidavit, no mention of the date of publication of the substance of Section 6 notification in the locality is made. Although notice was issued under Section 5-A, the respondent had not, admittedly, objected to the acquisition. Consequently, declaration came to be made. Pursuant to the notice served under S. 9and 10 the respondents had participated in the enquiry held by the District Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon, and the Award was made on 17/7/1991. It is stated in the counter-affidavit that since there was a dispute as to the apportionment of compensation, a reference under Section 30 was made to the District court, Gurgaon, and the compensation was deposited to its credit. The writ petition filed by the respondent was allowed on 4/5/1992 by the Punjab and Haryana High court holding that publication of the substance of the notification under S. 4 (1 and 6 in the locality was mandatory and as they were not published in the locality, the acquisition was invalid for infraction of the mandatory provisions of S. 4 (1 and 6 (2 of the Act.