NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges notification dated 22.2.2006 (P.3) and declaration made on 20.7.2006 (P.6) which have been issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act'). A further prayer for quashing award dated 28.4.2008 (P.5) has also been made. THE petitioners purchased the land in question vide registered sale deed on 18.7.2001 and mutation in respect of this land was sanctioned in favour of the petitioners on 28.12.2009. THE petitioners claimed that they did not came to know about the acquisition and no notice was issued to them. Having heard the learned counsel we are of the considered view that this petition is frivolous piece of litigation because no petition is maintainable after the award has been announced and possession of the land is taken. THE land after the award would vest in the State free from all encumbrances. If the petitioners have failed to receive any notice then no fault can be found with the respondents because notice is always issued to the parties as per the record. THE names of the petitioners were not reflected in the revenue record and admittedly mutations were sanctioned in their favour only on 28.12.2009. THE acquisition proceedings have already culminated in the passing of award on 28.4.2008. THEre is no allegation that notice to the predecessor in interest has not been issued. It is obvious that the petitioners did not file any objection under Section 5 A of the Act.

(2.) IT is well settled that no writ petition after the award would be competent which it the present case was announced on 28.4.2008 and the writ petition has been filed after two years. In that regard reliance may be placed on the judgments of Honble the Supreme Court rendered in the cases of Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay v. Industrial Development and Investment Company (P) Limited, (1996) 11 SCC 501; Municipal Council, Ahmednagar v. Shah Hyder Beig, (2000) 2 SCC 48; C. Padma v. Deputy Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, (1997) 2 SCC 627; Star Wire (India) Ltd. v. State of Haryana, (1996) 11 SCC 698; and M/s Swaika Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, JT 2008 (2) SC 280.