RAKESH BATRA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, challenge is to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short the Act) dated December 16, 1988 (Annexure P-3) followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act, dated December 14, 1989 (Annexure P-5). The main ground on which notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Act are challenged is that the petitioner had made construction on the respective plots and under the policy of the Government such plots where construction existed were not to be acquired.

(2.) STATE in its written statement has stated that land where construction existed at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act was released from acquisition and was not acquired and only vacant land was acquired. It is stated that on the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, there did not exist any construction on the land acquired. Petitioner did not file replication to controvert the stand of the State that there did not exist any construction on the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and that only the vacant land was acquired meaning thereby that the stand of the State in this regard has gone uncontroversial. Otherwise too, no material worth the name has been placed on record to show that any construction existed on the land acquired at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Petitioner cannot derive any benefit from the construction raised after the issuance of the notification. Moreover, no policy/instructions of the Government providing that the land over which construction is in existence would be exempted, has been placed on record. In absence of any policy/instructions of the Government, it cannot be contended that the land on which construction had been raised, is liable to be exempted.

(3.) FROM a reading of Annexure P-7 i.e. Memo. dated 6.1.1993 from the Land Acquisition Collector to the Director, Urban Estate, Haryana, I find that on issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, petitioner had filed objections under Section 5-A of the Act. On receipt of the objections, Joint Inspection Committee released land bearing Khasra Nos. 1264/1029, 1067/1034- Min, 1065/1029, 1268/1034 Min, 1266/1029, 1035 Min measuring 8 Bighas 17 Biswas, and rest of the area bearing Khasra No. 1267/1029, 1035-Min, 1037, 1038, 1261/1034 Min, 1268/1034 Min measuring 11 Bighas 13 Biswas was included in the declaration under Section 6 of the Act. It means that the land which was under construction was released and only vacant land was acquired. Representations made by the petitioner for release of land were considered by the Government and rejected firstly on 30.5.1992 and then on 9.6.1993. At this state, it also deserves to be noticed that some of the land owners taking a stand that the land on which construction were made is to be exempted, filed various writ petitions and the same were dismissed by the Court. Reference in this regard be made to order dated 18.2.1991 passed in CWP No. 8070 of 1990; dated 23.7.1991 passed in CWP No. 2730 of 1991; dated 2.8.1991 passed in CWP No. 2676 of 1991 and dated 26.8.1991 passed in CWP No. 12361 of 1990.