NARINDER KUMAR BAJAJ Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant petition, the petitioners challenge the validity of a notification, as became issued under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter for short called as the 'Act of 1894'). Moreover, the petitioners also make a challenge to the validity of issuance of a notification under Sec. 6 of the 'Act of 1894' besides to the consequent thereto award, thus on the ground, that the issuance of the notification(s) (supra) is a colourable exercise of power and are also discriminatory in nature.

(2.) The above notification(s) became respectively issued on 23/2/1989 (Annexure P-1) and on 22/2/1990 (Annexure P-3).

(3.) When the instant writ petition came up for hearing on 5/8/2024, the hereinafter extracted order was passed. It is pointed out that application for amending the writ petition bearing CM-31475-2001 was ordered to be heard alongwith main case, vide order dtd. 23/5/2003. Mr. Goel has referred to Annexure P-4 to point out that the land had been released on 15/12/2009, after the passing of the award on 21/2/1992 (Annexure P5) and in the case of petitioner No.l on 17/11/1994. It is, thus, submitted that since the case is based on the issue of discrimination, it would be appropriate that the reply be filed on merits to amended writ petition also. Let, needful be done alongwith the layout plan as referred in Annexure P-4, which will also show the location of all the three alleged ownership rights of the petitioners. The civil suit in which the stay was granted, on the basis of which the award was passed subsequently on 17/11/1994for khasra No.4374/1, be also appended for the perusal of this Court.