ANIL GARG Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges notification dated 7.9.2007 (P-10), issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, 'the Act') and declaration dated 19.1.2009 (P-12), made under Section 6 of the Act. The short question which arise for consideration in this case is whether the last date of publication of notification acquiring land and the date of publication of such public notice would be the date for reckoning the period of one month for filing objections and for all other purposes.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased land measuring 6 Kanals 5 Marlas, comprised in Rect. No. 170, Killa No. 18/2/3 (0-5), 23/2/1 (0-11), 18/2/2 (0-6), 23/2/2 (0-15), 23/2/3 (3-10), 18/2/1 (0-17) and Rect. No. 199, Killa No. 3/3 (0-1), situated within the revenue estate of village Chandhut, Tehsil and District Palwal, vide three different sale deeds dated 13.12.2002. On 28.12.2002, mutations were sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. The land in question has been purchased by the petitioner for installing and running of a petrol pump through the dealership of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited. It is claimed that the petitioner as well as the Indian Oil Corporation at their ends initiated various steps for installation of the petrol pump such as process for obtaining No Objection Certificate from the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad, obtaining of electricity connection etc. The petitioner also invested huge money for filling earth, leveling the land and on fencing. However, on 7.9.2007, the respondent State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4 proposing to acquire 19 Kanals of land for the purpose of construction of Police Line and Police Station at village Chandhut, which also includes the land belonging to the petitioner (P-10). On 5.6.2008, the petitioner filed objections under Section 5-A of the Act against the proposed acquisition seeking release of his land (P-11). On 9.1.2009, declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made acquiring the land in question (P-12). The grievance of the petitioner is that without affording an opportunity of hearing to him by the Land Acquisition Collector, declaration under Section 6 of the Act has been made. Later on, under the Right to Information Act, 2005, he came to know about some proceedings held on 29.7.2008 about which no notice dated 29.7.2008 was ever served to him.

(3.) In the preliminary submission of the written statement filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 it has been asserted that the land in question has been acquired after religiously following various provisions of the Act. After making of declaration under Section 6 of the Act, dated 19.1.2009, even award has been announced on 5.2.2010 and the possession of the acquired land was taken and handed over to the Superintendent of Police, District Palwal on the same day vide Rapat No. 158, dated 5.2.2010. As such the land vests in the police department free from all encumbrances for the construction of the Police Station Chandhat. It has further been submitted that the petitioner can withdraw the amount of compensation and other statutory benefits under Sections 23(2) and 23(1)(a) of the Act, which have been adequately awarded by the Collector.