PARHLAD SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of C.W.P. Nos. 905, 907, 910, 1353, and 908 of 1986, as common question of law and facts are involved in all the cases.

(2.) Dealing first with C.W.P. 905/1986, all that requires to mentioned, in so far as the facts are concerned, is that the petitioner had constructed a Pucca house in Khasra No. 3096 as far back as 1966 and ever since he is residing there with his family. Vide notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) on 28th March, 1985, the house of the petitioner was intended to be acquired along with other land belonging to the petitioner and many others. The follow-up declaration under section 6 of the Act came into being on 16th January, 1986. The prayer of the petitioner is to quash notifications issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Act for the sole reason that he has constructed a house in Khasra No. 3096 and the policy of the Government not to acquire constructed houses or buildings would not permit the respondents to acquire the house constructed by the petitioner far prior to the issuance of notification under section 4 of the Act. In the written statement that has been filed, it has been admitted that the petitioner had actually built a house in Khasra No. 3096 and the same has been excluded from the acquisition proceedings.

(3.) In so far as the facts of C.W.P. 907/1986 are concerned, the same are identical. The petitioners of the said case had also constructed a house each in Khasra No. 10976/2821 and 10979/2822. The plea of the petitioners is the same i.e. in pursuance of policy of the Government, buildings constructed prior to issuance of notification under section 4 of the Act cannot be acquired. The respondents have admitted the construction and clearly stated that so far as built houses are concerned the same have already been left out of the array of acquisition.