HARI SINGH KATARIA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to letter, Annexure P-10, dated 8.3.2001 vide which the Government reviewed its earlier decision and, thus, decided to withdraw its order regarding release of land of the petitioners, measuring 2510 sq. yards situated in Sector 5, Gurgaon, falling in Khasra No. 7360/3072. Earlier in point of time, vide order, Annexure P-6, dated 20.7.1999, while dealing with representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-5, Government had agreed to release land of the petitioners measuring 2510 sq. yards from the purview of acquisition. It is this order, Annexure P-6, that has since been reviewed vide the impugned order, Annexure P-10.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as projected in the petition, reveal that the petitioners owned land in village Gurgaon. The land was comprised in Khasra Nos. 3045 and 7360/3072. In Khasra No. 3045, however, the petitioners had constructed shops and sheds while in Khasra No. 7360/3072, as per the petitioners, there were two Samadhis of their forefathers, a temple and trees. The total area of Khasra No. 7360/3072 is 1 Bighas 3 Biswas (approximately 5000 sq. yards) and the present petition concerns the land falling in Khasra No. 7360/3072. The State Government issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the 'Act of 1894') on 28.3.1985 seeking to acquire a huge tract of land measuring 169.87 acres situated in the revenue estate of village Gurgaon, for a public purpose, namely, for development and utilisation of land for residential and commercial area at Gurgaon. The entire land of the petitioners, falling in khasra numbers, referred to above, was also intended to be acquired and was indeed acquired when follow-up declaration came into being on 16.1.1986. Aggrieved, petitioners filed Civil Writ Petition No. 860 of 1986 in this Court challenging the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act of 1894. Notice of motion was issued in the writ petition aforesaid on 20.2.1986. During the pendency of the writ petition, Land Acquisition Collector announced award on 14.1.1988. It is the case of petitioners that they had not accepted compensation awarded to them so far. On 6.7.1982 writ petition aforesaid was disposed of. Insofar as writ petition, as it pertained to Khasra No. 3045, is concerned, same was rendered infructuous as the Government, in wake of its policy not to acquire the constructed area, had left the land falling in Khasra No. 3045 from the array of acquisition, on which construction was in existence. The full text of order passed by this Court in CWP No. 860 of 1986, which was incidentally decided by one of the us (V.K. Bali, J.), has been annexed with the replication as Annexure P-14. The short order that was passed in the aforesaid writ petition on July 6, 1992 reads thus :-

(3.) IN response to notice issued by this Court, respondents have filed reply and by way of preliminary objections, it has been pleaded that the petitioners had earlier filed Civil Writ Petition No. 860 of 1986 which was decided by this Court on 6.7.1992. The relevant part of order, dealing with the land in question, passed by this Court, has been reproduced in the preliminary objections and it has then been pleaded that in the present petition, same very dispute regarding same land has been agitated by challenging letter dated 8.3.2001 and, therefore, petition is liable to be dismissed. It has then been pleaded that the petitioners had filed civil suit for declaration in the year 1994 which was also dismissed on 3.9.1997, thus, upholding the land acquisition proceedings. The petitioners filed yet another civil suit No. 8 of 1999 but the learned trial Court did not pass any interim order. However, the petitioners submitted a representation for release of their land to the then Minister for Development on 25.4.1999. In the said representation, the petitioners deliberately concealed the material facts that the suit filed by them was dismissed on 3.9.1997. Thus, having believed in good faith and on the basis of wrong information given by the office of the Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon, that the land is under litigation, the Government considered to release the land on general terms and conditions and specifically with condition to withdraw the court case, if any, pending in the Court. However, at the time of executing the agreement, the petitioners supplied the certified copies of civil suit No. 535 of 17.10.1994 and the judgment dated 3.9.1997 vide which the said suit was dismissed. The non- disclosure of material facts by the petitioners at the time of submitting the representation led the Government to review its earlier decision and to withdraw the orders regarding release of land and to take possession thereof.